Mike Munger reports on Libertarian National Convention

Via IPR trackbacks, Dr. Munger writes at Kids Prefer Cheese:

Neanderbill and I joined the NC state delegation to the Libertarian National Convention.

Here is a brief video of our arrival at the bar last night, greeting our fellow Libertarian Party members.

[Ponda Baba gives Neanderbill a rough shove and starts yelling at NB in an alien language which NB doesn’t understand]
Dr. Evazan: [explaining] He doesn’t like you.
NB: Sorry.
Dr. Evazan: [grabbing NB] *I* don’t like you either. You just watch yourself. We’re wanted men. I have petitioned for ballot access in twelve states.
NB: I’ll be careful.
Dr. Evazan: You’ll be de-credentialed!
Obi-Wan: [intervening] This gigantic one’s not worth the effort. Now, let me get you something.
[Dr. Evazan shoves NB across the room and pulls out a quorum call]
Bartender: No quorum calls! No quorum calls!
[Obi-Wan pulls out his microphone, severing Ponda Baba’s eardrum with a point of parliamentary inquiry]

Okay, no, seriously, here are some pix. Here is the view from the floor of the big screens up front. And here is David Nolan (yes, the chart guy, and founder of the LP) making a point. Oh, and don’t forget StarChild. StarChild is the best.


Post-convention report:

Whoa. The LP National Convention was pretty darned tiring. Didn’t help that we had to drive Raleigh to St Louis to Raleigh. That’s 1,700 miles for the round trip.

But we got to see some great stuff. I enjoyed giving the main banquet speech (Neil Boortz out, Munger in! Strange…), and Dr. Mary Ruwart did a terrific job raising big $$ for ballot access.

We elected a new LNC.

And, of course, Starchild was in the house. This outfit, I thought was a tour de force. (Picture from Mike S., who is the one wearing the blue sirt, and no top hat).

I feel I have to explain about Starchild. He is beloved, and rightly so. Sure, the way he dresses is a bit over top / under the bottom / whatever you want to say. But he is amazingly charismatic, gentle, and serious. His message is of real brother / sisterhood, and that you have to look past the outside, whether it’s skin color or feather boas (or, as in the picture above, a big black bow tied like a present over a black silk thong) to see the real person. If that is not the core of libertarianism I don’t know what is. Starchild is the best, seriously. (And the ladies in our delegation were pretty vocal in their admiration of Starchild’s hard work at the gym, and were glad that he was willing to share it publicly. Some things are complex, and some are simple. Starchild is mostly pretty simple, in the best possible way…)

183 thoughts on “Mike Munger reports on Libertarian National Convention

  1. Stewart Flood

    I thought that the formal attire (w/tophat) for Monday’s session and the LNC meeting set a good tone for the day. And some in our state’s delegation were wondering why the green lady liberty outfit didn’t make it to the floor this time…

  2. John Jay Myers

    I have no problems with Starchild, though when I came into my room Sunday night and found Starchild and his lady friend in my bed… that was where ….. okay I still didn’t draw the line.

    I just went into the other room and had a great time with all the people in the suite.

  3. Unprofessional

    He belongs in a Gay parade, not a what is suppose to be a professional convention. I am sorry but this is not a HULOOWEEEEN party. He can be a nice guy all he wants, but most people who are voting is not going to take this seriously. They will regard this party as a nut jobs. Sorry but that is reality.

  4. I know what we should do

    How about a person dressed as a Nazi, with a person dressed from a prison camp and a grim reaper, how that. Maybe that just might happen and they can all sit with Star Child,

  5. Andy

    A Libertarian Party National Convention just wouldn’t be the same without Starchild. He’s become a fixture in the party.

  6. Thomas L. Knapp

    “He belongs in a Gay parade, not a what is suppose to be a professional convention.”

    When you’ve been quoted on policy in the New York Times, received half as many votes as the Republican candidate in a three-way partisan election for state legislature, etc., then you might be qualified to lecture Starchild on what is and what is not “professional.”

  7. Eternaverse

    This is why I refuse to join the LP. Bigots (#4)like this guy here. I was at St Louis (I was not a delegate). I heard many racist, sexist, and homophobic commits coming from delegates there. That’s what scares off good people, not dedicated activists like Starchild.

    @ 4~ What professionals are you speaking of? The professional politicians who allocate funds and make plans to blow up school-children in Iraq, and who pass laws that put people in jail for conducting voluntary transactions?

    The suits are the bad-guys; they’re the ones who are attacking our rights. Why the hell would we want to dress like them?

  8. LP Pragmatist

    1/2 the crowd at the LP convention were wearing suits. Not everyone wearing a suit is a “bad-guy”. At least not the libertarians in St. Louis.

  9. From a physcological point

    These people are craving for attention as well as acceptance, because they are insecure within themselves. They push their lifestyles on others. If they were so secure they would not turn this party into a circus. San Francisco for example, a very socialist, area, gun rights are taken away for example. Suits are the bad guy you say. I guess that makes Ron Paul a bad guy, I guess that makes Rand Paul a bad guy.
    Mr. Knapp take Starchild with you to your new party.

  10. To LP Pragmist

    Is there a way I could talk to you more, it seems you are aware of things. Thank you.

  11. Eternaverse

    @ 10~ I never meant to convey anyone who wheres a suit is a bad-guy, that would be simply stupid to say. I wear a suit sometimes. The statement was hyperbolic. What I was doing was pointing out the hypocrisy of trying to look like “the professionals”, when the professionals are our enemy!

    @ 11~ Once again proving my point; any rational person who reads this will see it’s just filled with prejudge. “Mr. Knapp take Starchild with you to your new party.” Yes, because Starchild lacks the right to make choices for himself. You’re an idiot.

  12. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Mr. Knapp take Starchild with you to your new party.”

    No can do.

    First of all, Starchild goes where Starchild damn well pleases. I’m always happy to walk with him when our paths coincide, but I’m not his navigator, or his boss.

    Secondly, I’m not aware that I’m going to, or forming, a “new party.” I’ve got two old ones I’m reasonably happy with as parties go, and my personal trajectory at the moment is toward less, not more, involvement in electoral politics.

  13. tell you what

    Lets have Long John silver show up, even maybe those obese women in a bikini, how that for a view during the convention.

  14. LibertarianGirl

    personally , seeing what Starchild is wearing is the most interesting part of the entire day , and I look forward to it. also , for those with small minds , Starchild is a perfect example of “dont judge a book by its cover” , he is incredibly smart and insightful and also has been around longer than most of us.
    Incidentally , he’s the only person besides david Nolan I got my picture taken with:) oh , and DAMN THAT DUDE GOES TO THE GYM …. WHEW ! – SMOKIN HOT!did u see those effin abs?

  15. LibertarianGirl

    John Jay Myers // Jun 4, 2010 at 10:46 pm

    JJ_I have no problems with Starchild, though when I came into my room Sunday night and found Starchild and his lady friend in my bed… that was where ….. okay I still didn’t draw the line.

    I just went into the other room and had a great time with all the people in the suite.

    me_ROFLMAO , u are awesome John Jay 🙂

    stew_
    I thought that the formal attire (w/tophat) for Monday’s session and the LNC meeting set a good tone for the day. And some in our state’s delegation were wondering why the green lady liberty outfit didn’t make it to the floor this time…

    me_ actually , I was a little disappointed in the Top Hat outfit ( no offense Starchild) I thought it was too tame 🙁

  16. Jim Davidson

    Ray – it isn’t the suit jackets that bother me, nor the suit pants. Tight jeans don’t work as well as tailored slacks for the same reason that a motel doesn’t work for a large event – no ballroom.

    It’s the neckties. The GOP-lite contingent were running around wearing neckties, which are effectively nooses. Isn’t it droll how the 18th Century “nobility” were convinced to wear nooses when they appeared in public. Makes it so much easier for the king’s men to hang them.

  17. tell the millions of voters that

    Millions of voters who care about this country, Starchild will certainly give those people the wrong impression about this party. But of course sure why not, we don’t care if this party succeeds or not right. Britney spears made a real show of herself, well it doesn’t matter anymore she has the money, but not out there like she use to be. Oh Mr. Clinton did what he wanted, he got impeach. Oh yea a lot of famous porno stars are real famous. Starchild is a good dresser but in the wrong profession. He belongs on the street.

  18. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Millions of voters who care about this country, Starchild will certainly give those people the wrong impression about this party.”

    Starchild is a San Francisco/Bay Area person. By the standards of the community he lives in (geographically) and associates with (globally, based on intererests), he’s not especially weird. A little more flamboyant than the norm, possibly, but not greatly so.

    The party is full of people like that.

    Take Wayne Allyn Root for example.

    In Las Vegas, Wayne probably raises few eyebrows because his brash/brazen self-promotional style is the norm there.

    He’d probably fit right in at an Amway convention, too.

    Anywhere else, a large percentage of people will almost certainly consider him hilarious at best and bizarre and disturbing at worst.

    If there’s room for Wayne in the LP, there had damn well better be room for Starchild.

  19. LP Pragmatist

    Hell, there is room for everyone, if we all agree that some people have specific talents that are needed to help drive the LP brand.

  20. paulie Post author

    He belongs in a Gay parade,

    Absolutely. If possible, with a massive LP banner.

    A Libertarian Party National Convention just wouldn’t be the same without Starchild. He’s become a fixture in the party.

    True dat.

    When you’ve been quoted on policy in the New York Times, received half as many votes as the Republican candidate in a three-way partisan election for state legislature, etc., then you might be qualified to lecture Starchild on what is and what is not “professional.”

    True dat too.

  21. paulie Post author

    This is why I refuse to join the LP. Bigots (#4)like this guy here.

    What makes you think she’s a guy?

    I was at St Louis (I was not a delegate). I heard many racist, sexist, and homophobic commits coming from delegates there. That’s what scares off good people, not dedicated activists like Starchild.

    Both scare off some people. But the fact is that both should have freedom of association (and disassociation) and as long as they don’t want to use initiation of force to make the unwilling live their way, they can coexist in the LP. That does not mean they have to be friends.


    @ 4~ What professionals are you speaking of? The professional politicians who allocate funds and make plans to blow up school-children in Iraq, and who pass laws that put people in jail for conducting voluntary transactions?

    The suits are the bad-guys; they’re the ones who are attacking our rights. Why the hell would we want to dress like them?

    Now you are being the bigot.

    People who wear suits are not all alike. They are individuals. I have known many good people who sometimes, or even frequently, wear suits.

    I’ve worn suits at times. They did nothing to change who I am.

  22. paulie Post author

    These people are craving for attention as well as acceptance, because they are insecure within themselves. They push their lifestyles on others.

    Again, enough of this bigotry against all my good friends who wear suits! 😛

  23. paulie Post author

    LPP

    Is there a way I could talk to you more, it seems you are aware of things. Thank you.

    I can put you in touch if she’s OK with it. I wouldn’t recommend it, though, unless you like a lot of calls at all hours of the day and night.

    Nobody cares what I say.
    I’m just another nobody.

    Talk about false modesty 🙂

  24. paulie Post author

    maybe Starchild can dress as Lady Godiva. it is almost all off.

    We may not be able to get any business done as a convention body, although his personal business may pick up quite a bit.

  25. paulie Post author

    or those with small minds , Starchild is a perfect example of “dont judge a book by its cover” , he is incredibly smart and insightful and also has been around longer than most of us.

    True.


    Incidentally , he’s the only person besides david Nolan I got my picture taken with:)

    Pretty sure we had our pic snapped. Maybe in Chris B’s room. I think you were sloshed 🙂

  26. paulie Post author

    actually , I was a little disappointed in the Top Hat outfit ( no offense Starchild) I thought it was too tame

    He has been known to rock the vampire teeth with that one.

  27. @31

    I can put you in touch if she’s OK with it. I wouldn’t recommend it, though, unless you like a lot of calls at all hours of the day and night.

    of course this is a false statement.

  28. paulie Post author

    Millions of voters who care about this country, Starchild will certainly give those people the wrong impression about this party.

    Why, because people “like him” don’t care? How do you know?

    Starchild is a good dresser but in the wrong profession.

    He’s a professional escort. How’s he in the wrong profession?

  29. paulie Post author

    @ 35

    of course this is a false statement.

    Completely true in my experience. Others I have talked to have told me the same thing.

  30. paulie Post author

    If there’s room for Wayne in the LP, there had damn well better be room for Starchild.

    There’s room for both. Thank God.

  31. paulie Post author

    Hell, there is room for everyone, if we all agree that some people have specific talents that are needed to help drive the LP brand.

    My point exactly.

  32. calls

    I known people who comment about one call and run with it. I guess you are one of those people. I am not sure who other you are talking about, since I am very limited in my circle. This is funny.

  33. paulie Post author

    Yeah, it was a lot more than one call, LOL. Anyway, I don’t have your number since you block it. You want me to put you in touch with LPP or not?

  34. haaa haaa

    First paulie who is this person? you can write me private if you like, unless he doesn’t care if LPP is posted on here. As other than the name, I don’t know this person from Adams.

    Yea the call to you was what maybe six months ago without going into details.

  35. paulie Post author

    Umm, no, it was while I was in NM, which would have been maybe three months ago, not 6. And it was a bunch of calls. I guess I have your OK now so now I just need his. As soon as I get that I’ll email both of you, then you can talk.

  36. To Paulie

    I was asking first who is this person and for you Paulie to write to me private. as again I do not know this guy from Adams.

  37. Tom Blanton

    The notion that an entire political party will be written off because of a glimpse of an individual such as Starchild attending a national convention is nonsense.

    Apparently, some cretins have never seen a Republican or Democratic convention on TV. If so, they would have seen dozens of hideously deformed mutants screaming and writhing in a frenzy of madness. No sane person would want to join up with such a cult.

    Seeing a former LP Presidential candidate who didn’t own a decent suit when he was nominated call for a LP dress code and encouraging LP members to dress as if they were going to a prom is true weirdness – and boring.

    However, if one must join a cult in order to participate in the sport of electoral politics, I suppose the LP would be the least objectionable of the alternatives available.

    I agree with Badnarik. Everyone should dress like they are going to a prom, but in addition, they should all be made up to look like zombies.

    Prom of the Living Dead: The Dance of Death That Never Ends

  38. Matt Cholko

    I wore a neck tie most of the time, and I’m not GOP-lite.

    In my opinion, the fact that at our convention you see men and women in suits, people in t-shirts, and Starchild in an angel costume all working together, and (for the most part) treating each other with equal respect, is one of the most important traits of our party. If this wasn’t the case, I’m not sure that I would want to be involved.

    Here’s a story for you – 2 years ago, when I was on the outskirts of the LP, I watched the convention on CSPAN. I saw Starchild ask a question during (I think) the chair’s debate. He was wearing an outlandish costume. For a good while after that, I talked to my associates about how the LP has to force people like that out if we are ever to be taken seriously. Some time later, I realized that if we’re going to force out people who wear costumes, we may as well pack up and go home – we would be no different than the Rs and Ds. Later still, I realized that we would be better off if more people had the balls to do what Starchild does. Finally, in the weeks preceeding the 2010 convention, I found myself looking forward to finally meeting the premier Libertarian icon – Starchild.

    When Starchild shows up in what are seemingly ridiculous costumes and conducting business at the convention in a professional manner, and the convention delegates don’t raise an eyebrow, it demonstrates one of the most libertarian principles – respect for people who are different from us. It allows us to show the rest of the world that we really are the Party of Principle.

    BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING – I know that Starchild isn’t really “different from us”, but when he wears his costumes, to the untrained observer, he appears to be different.

  39. Thomas L. Knapp

    “Seeing a former LP Presidential candidate who didn’t own a decent suit when he was nominated call for a LP dress code and encouraging LP members to dress as if they were going to a prom is true weirdness”

    Heh … I said something similar to Michael right after that speech.

    The guys who packed themselves into cars like sardines, slept on floors and showed up on the floor in t-shirts and baseball caps in Atlanta were the people who put him into real contention.

    Yes, he made the most of it with his debate performance, etc., but if they hadn’t shown up to give him a base to build on, it would have been a two-way race between Russo and Nolan.

  40. Poor example for kids

    He is a male prostitute, next you’ll be saying it’s ok to have sex out in the open.

  41. Thomas L. Knapp

    Prostitution is an honorable profession which serves a genuine market demand. When practiced well, it is one of humanity’s highest forms of art. From what I’ve heard, Starchild is on par with Leonardo or Michelangelo as such things go.

    From my kids’ point of view, however, he is not a male prostitute, he’s just a cool guy. The uncool guys are the ones running around in a constant state of the vapors over the imagined fragility of the chilllllllllllllllldrrrrrennnnnnnnnnn.

    Having sex out in the open is (e.g. outside of private clubs where people who like that sort of thing choose to gather), in most cases, rude but it shouldn’t be illegal. It neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg.

    In terms of moral character and exemplary personal behavior, I’ll put Starchild up against your average American six days a week and twice on Sunday.

  42. Eternaverse

    “People who wear suits are not all alike. They are individuals. I have known many good people who sometimes, or even frequently, wear suits.”

    I have nothing against people who wear suits, I have already stated I wear suits sometimes. Who I do have a problem with are the suit-Nazis who want everyone else to dress like them.

  43. paulie Post author

    @ 55 Yes, I saw the followup comment subsequently. I have a problem with discriminating against someone because they do or do not wear a suit, or (especially) demanding that everyone or no one may wear one.

    I would not go so far as to call either nazis, unless they call for mass extermination of those of whose outfits they disapprove.

  44. Brian Holtz

    Starchild is awesome. I’ll take all the Starchilds we can get. And not just because his filibusters at the convention microphone tend to decrease support for the positions he advocates. 🙂 He is intelligent, principled, well-spoken, courteous, even-tempered, and fearless.

  45. Tom Blanton

    Matt says @ #47:

    I saw Starchild ask a question during (I think) the chair’s debate. He was wearing an outlandish costume. For a good while after that, I talked to my associates about how the LP has to force people like that out if we are ever to be taken seriously. Some time later, I realized that if we’re going to force out people who wear costumes, we may as well pack up and go home – we would be no different than the Rs and Ds.

    Suits and ties ARE costumes!

    People who celebrate freedom should embrace Starchild, not because of clothing but because he embraces freedom and is very good at articulating the message of freedom. Being free means you don’t have to worry about what other people wear and it means you don’t have to worry about what someone thinks of you because of what somebody else is wearing.

    The most vile and depraved thugs, theives and liars I know of wear suits and ties – so that rubes will trust them and take them seriously.

    I think I’d have a problem with a group where everyone dressed like Starchild, but I’d have a bigger problem with a group where everyone wore suits and ties.

  46. Matt Cholko

    Standing offer – If George Phillies allows Starchild to dress him in a Starchildesque costume for a full day of the 2012 convention, I’ll vote for the Chair and Presidential candidates of his choice.

  47. LibertarianGirl

    if that chick is the 1 Bruce gave my number to, she absolutely calls like a stalker . she called me a disturbing amount of times before I had ever talked to her and many , many , many other times. I had to just ignore them because altho she lived in NV I did not want her help because it was clear she is disturbed. anyone that would call that much has deep seated issues.

  48. To Libertarian Girl

    Before you start to make statements that are lying slanderous statements that can seriously get you into trouble. I have proof. I want to also clarify that Bruce Cohen had told me to call you, he told me you wanted to talk to me, he kept insisting that you wanted to get in touch with me because he told me you liked a lot of what I said. You don’t even have the nerve to say anything to my face directly and, Also I want to make it CLEAR you had a conversation telling me about a lot of negative things against some people. Bruce Cohen had also mentioned you had the hots for him. He raved about a lot of things about you and how he could get you and such. I have not spoken to Bruce nor have I spoken to you. I want to make clear that I ONLY CALLED because BRUCE INSISTED! Bruce had given out my emails without my permission to you. So if none if this is true you better had discuss this with Bruce. If you don’t want a lot of dirty laundry aired out. I suggest this STOPS NOW!!!!

  49. Tom

    I gathered that libertarian girl is an officer of the libertarian party I believe. She should be behaving more responsibly and get her facts straight.

  50. paulie Post author

    @ The person who posted 64 and 65 (bracing for counter that they are a married couple, roommates, co-workers, etc):

    Before you start to make statements that are lying slanderous statements that can seriously get you into trouble. I have proof.

    Of what? How much you call people? That is the only thing LG and I have said about you.

    I want to also clarify that Bruce Cohen had told me to call you, he told me you wanted to talk to me, he kept insisting that you wanted to get in touch with me because he told me you liked a lot of what I said. [..] Bruce Cohen had also mentioned you had the hots for him. He raved about a lot of things about you and how he could get you and such.[..]I want to make clear that I ONLY CALLED because BRUCE INSISTED!

    So, you consider(ed) everything B. Cohen says to be automatically true and do/did whatever he says?

    Cohen appears to think all women want him. I’ve gathered that this is not necessarily a mutual perception of the situation in some, possibly many, cases. To be clear, I have had cross-complaints from both you and him that you are stalking each other.

    Also I want to make it CLEAR you had a conversation telling me about a lot of negative things against some people.

    So? Any rule against people expressing personal opinions in a private conversation? And if you “reveal” this information, why should anyone believe you anyway?

  51. To Paulie @66

    #65 is not related to me in any way.

    No I do not consider everything Bruce says to be true. I realized this as time went on. I just didn’t know him like some other people knew him. What some people have mentioned about him came to light even to me, so I didn’t want anything further to do with the situation, as well as what he was doing towards me.

    I will tell you this Paulie, you are correct to say Bruce Cohen think all women want him. I have none and never will have any interest in Bruce Cohen. I am a very happy married woman. My only interest was to the Libertarian Party. Don’t think my husband doesn’t know all this. LOL

    Also regardless, Libertarian Girl who is suppose to be in an official position, the call was with regard to a political situation. I cannot help the fact she refuse to act professional when people might have questions they want to know with regards to the party. If she cannot be bothered to answer or return calls regardless of what Bruce says, then she should not hold office. You don’t hold a title of office then turn things around, this is an abuse of position. I have heard the same from other people. To do something like this is only going to make a person lose their own creditability. The truth always comes out. Further more, if she wanted to, she should have investigated the situation before blurting out something that is not true and realized the facts.

    This is what a professional would have done.

  52. paulie Post author

    #65 is not related to me in any way.

    So it’s just a coincidence you have the same IP address?

    I haven’t checked. Maybe you are using the same anonymizer?

  53. Big companies

    can have the same IP address. I was expecting you to respond with that. I found that out on another incident when I was checking something out myself,. I thought all machines had their own IP address, but no they can all be on one IP addresses.

  54. paulie Post author

    OK, so, someone else at your office who you do not know is here to say the same things as you are saying, without being prompted by you to do so.

  55. oh brother

    Paulie, if you wish to know more, I suggest you contact me further privately if you wish. This is really not the the place to discussing this.

    I will tell you this however. There are a lot of people that know about this site and the people that do know me know my qualifications.
    I am done discussing this. Thank you.

  56. paulie Post author

    OK. I know, we get this all the time. Just the other day I was called a communist on one of the threads here, and like four of my non-political drinking friends popped up to say I’m totally not a commie. I didn’t even know they read IPR. And their grasp of Karl Hess and anarchism without adjectives took me completely aback – I had no idea 🙂

    (I’m done busting your chops about this though…it’s really silly).

  57. Carolyn Marbry

    Wow. Just… wow.

    Personal freedom and personal responsibility, remember? Not initiating force? Not trying to tell other people how to live their lives…?

    Or for the Christians in the room, how about “judge not that ye be not judged,” out of the book of Matthew?

    So let me get this straight: We are all about legalizing marijuana and prostitution and same-gender marriage and so on because people own themselves — as long as they’re dressed like IBM executives. But if the belly dancer belt goes on, all bets are off and it’s all about how we’re going to “scare away” the voters. Nope. We’ll only scare away those who are inclined to inflict their ideas of appropriate behavior on others.

    This “he should dress professionally” nonsense is just as hypocritical and just as in-your-face ironic as the Libertarian party convention, the only place in the world where Libertarians are 100% free to govern themselves their own way, being absolutely straitjacketed by Roberts Rules of Order and parliamentarian high priests.

  58. Carolyn Marbry

    @53: You said, “He is a male prostitute, next you’ll be saying it’s ok to have sex out in the open.”

    Non sequitur alert. That’s on a par with those folks who say that allowing gay couples to marry will lead to people marrying their dogs. Nope. Absolutely no causal connection between prostitution, even the dreaded MALE prostitution, and “having sex in the open,” nor for that matter between gay marriage and bestiality.

    As far as his being a bad influence on kids, what makes you think so — no, what EVIDENCE do you have for that? I’ve never EVER seen Starchild act less than responsibly around kids. He’s kind, gentle, thoughtful, circumspect. If anything, seeing him dress the way he does and also seeing how he’s such a great guy teaches kids not to be judgmental about their fellow human beings just based on what they wear.

    Are you sure you’re in the right party? Because so many of your attitudes are so tied to telling other people how to live and how to raise their kids…

  59. @75 consequences

    What you fail to understand, your free to do what you want, but there are consequences to the behavior. People will also have the freedom to draw their own conclusions.

  60. Carolyn Marbry

    Not really. You see, Starchild’s behavior has absolutely no impact on you. You weren’t at the convention. I would bet dollars to donuts you’ve not had a single solitary person say, “Well, y’know, I consider myself a Libertarian, but I just can’t abide that Starchild character, so I will remain a Republican.” NOT ONE. So what exactly is it you’re doing, here, demanding that he dress “professionally?”

    And your statement “Mr. Knapp take Starchild with you to your new party,” suggests that you would have Starchild leave the party because you don’t approve of his attire. That’s not “consequences” for behavior, that’s chasing someone out for being different from you. Suggesting that he is in any way a danger to children when there is NOTHING to support that claim is likewise just mean-spirited and judgmental.

    Yes, you have the freedom to draw your own conclusions and associate as you will. You do NOT have the freedom to choose who may or may not be a member of the Libertarian Party.

  61. A Odd Punk Rook

    Moron@75:
    “What you fail to understand, your free to do what you want, but there are consequences to the behavior. People will also have the freedom to draw their own conclusions.”

    And self filter for intractable judgmentalism?

    If this is really your fear, I would recommend getting people involved in some libertarian culture before throwing them into the pool with Starchild.

    Outside of that, where is your authority to manage perceptions? Are you ready to get filtered out because of how much of a turn off you are yourself to a different set of people?

  62. LibertarianGirl

    oh , and personally I coudnt wait to show my kids Starchilds pic , they think all Libs are boring geeks , I wanted to show them this isnt true , ecspecially my 17 year old who is dating a future girl to boy trans sexual. and as for lessons , Starchild is a lesson in creativity , self esteem and fun .

  63. LibertarianGirl

    “Also regardless, Libertarian Girl who is suppose to be in an official position, the call was with regard to a political situation.”

    me-there happened to be a death in my family , I was devastated and quit taking all calls , you called at least 20 times a day for a week , which led me to belive you were fucking crazy and i did not want your help even afterI was done mourning.

  64. LibertarianGirl

    I want to also clarify that Bruce Cohen had told me to call you, he told me you wanted to talk to “”me, he kept insisting that you wanted to get in touch with me because he told me you liked a lot of what I said. [..] Bruce Cohen had also mentioned you had the hots for him. He raved about a lot of things about you and how he could get you and such.[..]I want to make clear that I ONLY CALLED because BRUCE INSISTED!”

    ROFLMAO – i needed delegates to the LPN convention , Bruce told me you lived in NV , I was wanting to talk to you to get you credential friendly and up to reno to vote , that was the entire matter of business , and then I had a tragedy and really couldnt have cared less about the convention , I didnt bother to tell anyone , its nobodys business , and having never talked to you I REALLY didnt owe you one . I would have gladly called you a few days later wen I was able to but in the interim you called me like 20-30 times a day and I realized you were crazy and decided we didnt need anymore of that in the LN , crazy was what I was trying to vote against and why i needed delegates – we’ve got enuf thanku–
    as for the hots—LOL- everyone thinks I have the hots for them becuz im a shameless flirt

  65. Carolyn Marbry

    “You are quite right, please forgive me, Dame Marbry.”

    Come on, really? I wasn’t being snarky with you, there’s really no reason to be that way with me.

  66. LibertarianGirl

    “If you don’t want a lot of dirty laundry aired out. I suggest this STOPS NOW!!!!”

    me_ bring it , i didnt say shit except I didnt want Jim Burns or Jim Duensing as our US Senate candidates and why , everything i said was true , repeat it if you like but Im done discussing anyting with you troll , if I continue , Brian Holtz will blend a kitten and I cant have that.

    peace

  67. Carolyn Marbry

    @85, for whatever it’s worth, my experience of this person who is threatening you with blackmail was very similar. I wasn’t going to say anything, but with this threat out there, I feel like I need to back you and Paulie up on this.

    On the one hand, she wanted to be out of the loop on the Bruce Cohen situation and didn’t want to know what was going on, blah blah, but then I was getting several calls a day, my voice mail was filling up with messages, and I was getting emails from her asking to know what was going on. To her credit, once the situation was resolved, for the most part she backed off.

    Rule of thumb: If you call more than twice in one day in a non-emergency situation without getting a return call in between, you’re calling too much and no doubt annoying someone. It was true in high school when we were all chasing that “special someone,” and it’s true now.

  68. asian lady

    Interesting, She also seems to have a habit of lying. I guess it is true as there were mentioned of Libertarian girl being bi-polar.

  69. Sorry Guys, Truth Hurts

    You guys still don’t get it. Currently, you represent 3 to 5 percent of the voters, your ideas are being co-opted quite successfully by the Tea Party, and they are about to be co-opted by the Repubs. You market yourselves so poorly that your party turns off the voting majority with irrelevant weirdness.

    The voters are not coming to the LP as a result; you need to reach out to them by relating to them, not by looking down your noses at average folks, whom you view as straightjacketed and controlling. The fact is that they are what they are. You must lead them to trust liberty and you don’t do it by alienating them.

    It is all about marketing at this point. Highlighting your product characteristics which relate to your customer base is NOT compromising; it is selling. Putting on the social uniform which indicates seriousness and commitment (i.e. a business suit) is a tiny tiny compromise, which many people learn to make in order to achieve entry into the sanctums of power which rule our society.

    The fact that you folks rebel over the trivial, thus giving up the important reveals a childish mindset which is really the chief impediment to the LP’s success at this point. Until the LP has an image of being responsible enough that the average voter can trust them to reign in the government that controls almost every aspect of American life today, you guys will be viewed as a sideshow, a political irrelevancy.

  70. paulie Post author

    @ 91 from an article by Tom Knapp:

    The cargo cults are religions (or something resembling religions) which took root in South Pacific Islands after WWII. Observing that Westerners had such amenities as refrigerators, air conditioners, etc., and that Westerners were brought shiny new things by airplanes, the cargo cultists hypothesized a connection. They built elaborate replicas of technological devices — refrigerators of wood and bamboo which looked exactly like the Kenmore[TM] in your kitchen, in the hopes that, if they looked and acted enough like Westerners, the airplanes would arrive with shiny new stuff for them. Yes, this is an over-simplification, but it’ll do for the point I’m trying to make.

    Cargo Cult Libertarians observe that successful Republican and Democrat politicans wear suits and power ties, that successful Republican and Democrat politicians exude confidence, that successful Republican and Democrat politicians shy from the radical, and that successful Republican and Democrat politicians take a smooth, milquetoast, middle of the road, “well, Bob” approach in media interviews.

    From this, they hypothesize that if they, as Libertarians, wear suits and power ties, exude confidence, shy from the radical, and take a smooth, milquetoast, middle of the road, “well, Bob” approach in media interviews and public appearances, that they will magically become successful Libertarian politicians.

    Needless to say, it doesn’t work that way. Voters who want cuddly, well-dressed, moderate, confidence-exuding, “well Bob” politicians already have them. We call them Republicans and Democrats. The LP’s future, if it has one, lies precisely with those Americans who sense a need for a radical, in your face, “well, Bob, fuck the conventional wisdom” alternative.

  71. Matt Cholko

    @73 Said: So let me get this straight: We are all about legalizing marijuana and prostitution and same-gender marriage and so on because people own themselves — as long as they’re dressed like IBM executives. But if the belly dancer belt goes on, all bets are off and it’s all about how we’re going to “scare away” the voters. Nope. We’ll only scare away those who are inclined to inflict their ideas of appropriate behavior on others.

    You’re absolutely correct!

    @73 also said:

    This “he should dress professionally” nonsense is just as hypocritical and just as in-your-face ironic as the Libertarian party convention, the only place in the world where Libertarians are 100% free to govern themselves their own way, being absolutely straitjacketed by Roberts Rules of Order and parliamentarian high priests.

    LOL – it really is quite funny when I get to thinkin’ about it.

  72. Matt Cholko

    @91 – I agree with what I think is your underlying point. That is, we must present ourselves and our ideas in a way that the average Joe, who is neither a libertarian nor a political junkie, can understand and accept.

    To that end, I would suggest that Libertarian candidates and party officials (while conductiing party business) dress and act in a manner that society accepts as professional. And, I believe that nearly all of them do.

    As for “looking down [our] noses at them”, I totally agree. I think many libertarians are guilty of this far too often, myself included. We often act like people who don’t agree with us must just be too stupid to understand, or too blind to see the big evil government. We sometimes act as though we are smarter and better than everyone – even other libertarians, if they hold a different opinion than us.

    This is certainly not true in every case, or with every libertarian. I just mean that I see more of this type of behavior/attitude amongst libertarians than the general populous – and @91 is correct that is in not a good way to “sell” libertarianism.

  73. in response to #93

    I did not think you would get my point, and yes you sure did miss it.

    I am NOT talking about cargo cult politics. I am NOT talking about chameleon politics. I AM talking about relating to your voters. Please show me current polling data that in a meaningful way illustrates increased national support for the LP itself. Not libertarian ideas, but the Party itself.

    While support for libertarian ideas is burgeoning, support for the Party itself is not achieving significant growth. The reason is that you are not connecting the Party to voters. You are arrogantly demanding they come to you, and to top it off, you offend them as much as you can because you have disdain for them. Then, as you parade a Village People image, you expect the biggest supporters of economic liberty (conservatives) to go for that image(ha! ha!), and the Obama big government Liberals to suddenly embrace minimal government, Hispanics who are arguably the fastest growing demographic segment to reject their Catholic values, whites to embrace open border limitless immigration, etc., etc. This is exactly how the Libertarian party will be kept irrelevant, unless you manage your own marketing.

    Where is all this LP growth projected to come from? It has to come from people who see something in the LP for them. Mainstream voters are concerned about their futures, their jobs, their kids futures and jobs, terrorism and security to some extent. They don’t give a rat’s ass about the freedom to parade around like a drag queen, and they hardly care at all about the freedom to induldge in chemical self-pleasuring.
    Most people are scared that they are going to end up poor.

    So, does the LP talk about how economic freedom equals economic wealth? Nope, I see people being silly and demanding attention for it. Loser behavior. You have little time to get your act together. Elections are this fall.

  74. paulie Post author

    Please show me current polling data that in a meaningful way illustrates increased national support for the LP itself. Not libertarian ideas, but the Party itself.

    OK:

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/05/ballot-access-news-libertarian-party-national-registration-up-11-since-2008-all-other-nationally-organized-parties-decline/

    http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/lp-monday-message-facebook-fans-blow-past-40000

    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/05/libertarian-party-national-convention-fundraising-banquet-does-well/

  75. Brian Holtz

    Libertarians are 100% free to govern themselves their own way

    Yes, and the way that Libertarians have voluntarily chosen to govern themselves is stated in Bylaw 13: “The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised shall govern the Party in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules of order adopted by the Party.”

    If there are some circumstances in which Bylaw 13 may be suspended or ignored, then the Judicial Committee should probably be informed about them.

    2:00pm: Not initiating force? Not trying to tell other people how to live their lives…?
    2:39pm: Are you sure you’re in the right party?

    Inviting people out of the Party — whether because of their clothes, or because of their disapproval of somebody else’s clothes — may often be rude, but it is never force initiation. If everything is force initiation, then nothing is force initiation.

    how about “judge not that ye be not judged,” out of the book of Matthew?

    Would that be the Barnes commemorative edition? 🙂

    There were several people in St. Louis who were embarrassments to the LP, but I do not judge Starchild as being one of them. However, the social judging/shaming process is an important one, and we Libertarians believe it is a vital alternative to the force-initiating machinery of the nanny state.

    @91: Always be conventional!
    @93: Never be conventional!

    Yet another example of Holtz’s Law of Libertarian Polemics: “Every statement purporting to express a dispute among libertarians embeds a strawman or a fallacy of the excluded middle — and this statement is no exception.”

  76. paulie Post author

    While support for libertarian ideas is burgeoning, support for the Party itself is not achieving significant growth. The reason is that you are not connecting the Party to voters. You are arrogantly demanding they come to you, and to top it off, you offend them as much as you can because you have disdain for them.

    Nope, not at all. You are way off base there.

    Actually, you seem to be assuming voters are all alike. In reality, there are many different kinds of voters, and some are much more available for an alternative party than others. To take one of many examples, available voters for party switching are 90% under the age of 30, which is much different than all voters on average.

    Then, as you parade a Village People image, you expect the biggest supporters of economic liberty (conservatives)

    In rhetoric – at best.

    to go for that image(ha! ha!), and the Obama big government Liberals to suddenly embrace minimal government,

    Funny how conservatives to you are “the biggest supporters of economic liberty” rather than (as in reality) Bush Big Government Conservatives….whereas you classify all liberals as “Obama big government Liberals” rather than saying — biggest supporters of peace and civil liberties.

    Have you read this yet?

    http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2010/05/limits-of-libertarianism.html


    Hispanics who are arguably the fastest growing demographic segment to reject their Catholic values,

    Talk to them about opening the borders, bringing the troops home, economic opportunity and allowing their Catholic values to be shared by families, churches and communities without government interference.


    whites to embrace open border limitless immigration, etc., etc.

    We can’t appeal to everyone. Those who oppose free movement of labor and goods should go elsewhere, regardless of whether they are white, black, or purple with green polkadots. But as a matter of fact there are plenty of people who oppose border walls and a border garrison police state of all backgrounds.


    This is exactly how the Libertarian party will be kept irrelevant, unless you manage your own marketing.

    I’m all about marketing. Niche marketing specifically — those not served by the duopoly.

    Where is all this LP growth projected to come from?

    The millions of libertarians who haven’t been asked to join. The millions of young people and immigrants who don’t have a party yet. Anti-war, pro-civil liberties people who see that Obama has dashed their hopes and will not change anything.


    It has to come from people who see something in the LP for them. Mainstream voters are concerned about their futures, their jobs, their kids futures and jobs, terrorism and security to some extent. They don’t give a rat’s ass about the freedom to parade around like a drag queen, and they hardly care at all about the freedom to induldge in chemical self-pleasuring.

    Overgeneralization. Millions of people care about those things. Who should they vote for?


    Most people are scared that they are going to end up poor.

    As well they should be.

  77. paulie Post author

    So, does the LP talk about how economic freedom equals economic wealth?

    Of course.

    What a silly question!

  78. Oh this is rich

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070908181545AAwklMP

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArI2GhUmbotPB_oSwHp4zLQjzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20090409111956AAuqbWB

    How many electoral votes did you have in the libertarian party.

    Thats like saying your 4th largest football league in the US!

    The money raised is not a lot by todays standard, and to have 50,000 on facebook compared to how many actual voters that are out there is very ssad, I wouldn’t doubt the tea party has more money raised as well as members, and the oathkeepers as well.

  79. paulie Post author

    Tea Party is not a political party. Neither are oathkeepers. And none of them represent a comprehensive plan for cutting government in all areas – foreign and domestic, social and economic. I went to some tea parties this past April. It was not a libertarian crowd (small l) as far as the majority of people there.

    LP has done more, in a more sustained fashion, than any other party besides Democrats and Republicans in the past 80 or so years. Sure, cult of personality parties have come and gone, but that is different.

    Electoral votes: Well, what other non-D/Rs have gotten electoral votes since 1972? Even Perot did not get electoral votes.

    Registrations: A quarter million registrations, with a substantial gain without any organized effort to increase registration, obviously shows growing popular support.

    You asked for positive trends. I gave you positive trends. Now you are changing the standard towards comparisons that match apples and porpoises.

  80. LibertarianGirl

    I went to the Tea Party here , the big kickoff one “The showdown in Searchlite” – Reids hometown . there were a ton of speakers , one of them was saying something about supporting our troops( and I do ) – I started chanting ‘bring em home- bring em home- I got booed 🙂 then some dude yelled “hey Libertarian , you aint welcome here” I was stunned then I realized it was my good friend Chris Hansen…LOL

  81. Carolyn Marbry

    @100, I didn’t invite anyone to leave the party, nor did I tell anyone how to live. A question does not equal an imperative. That person, however, did make an imperative statement about taking Starchild out of the party with Knapp.

    I merely asked if they were sure they were in the right party since they seemed at odds with everything we have been promoting. Big difference. If their answer is yes, then so be it.

    Actually, the Book of Matthew is the first in the New Testament of the Bible. Something CHRISTIANS usually take to heart. Yes, it’s really there. I imagine you know that and you also probably recognize that Starchild is only being accused of wearing clothes that make people tut-tut, which is not remotely similar to being a convicted child molester, as is the case with Barnes.

    You brought him up, Holtz, not me. Why don’t you let the man’s infamy finally dissipate? Instead you drag his name through the mud AGAIN for really no reason but to browbeat me simply for holding a different opinion from yours in his case, regarding what freedom of association means and whether a convicted child molester who lied to the excomm and the judcomm and who ran for office right after telling the excomm he would not should remain in the party, especially in a position of power.

    It was completely unnecessary and obviously not applicable. Bad form, Holtz. Very bad form.

  82. Carolyn Marbry

    @89, why don’t you clarify exactly what you mean by “Asian Lady?” You’re surely not referring to yourself, and you’re likewise not referring to LG. So what could you possibly mean?

  83. Tom Blanton

    paulie @ 93:

    From this, they hypothesize that if they, as Libertarians, wear suits and power ties, exude confidence, shy from the radical, and take a smooth, milquetoast, middle of the road, “well, Bob” approach in media interviews and public appearances, that they will magically become successful Libertarian politicians.

    Needless to say, it doesn’t work that way. Voters who want cuddly, well-dressed, moderate, confidence-exuding, “well Bob” politicians already have them. We call them Republicans and Democrats. The LP’s future, if it has one, lies precisely with those Americans who sense a need for a radical, in your face, “well, Bob, fuck the conventional wisdom” alternative.

    100% correct!

    This is an idea I’ve been trying to sell to people wearing suits and ties for years and they just don’t buy it. It’s like trying to convince a born-again Southern Baptist that God and Santa aren’t the same mythical entity. I guess it’s because I’m not wearing a suit and tie.

    Who the hell wears a suit and tie anymore, anyway? Politicians, con men, and hucksters trying to sell you something for far more than it’s worth.

  84. Michael H. Wilson

    Tom @ 110 ask “Who the hell wears a suit and tie anymore, anyway?” Tom the correct answer is pimps, preachers and politicians. All three of whom are trying to sell you something that wasn’t theirs in the first place to sell. 😉

  85. meliisa

    To carolyn I think it is pretty clear what was said, do you not know how to read, maybe there a good reaston why you didn’t get elected. LOL

  86. Carolyn Marbry

    Yes, it is quite clear what was said, considering the phone conversation we had wherein I told you I was half asian, and given that I’m the only person on this thread who is. I just wanted you to come out with it.

    In your world, I guess racism is okay to show children but Starchild’s fashion sense is not. Very well.

  87. Paulie do check something.

    You might do some ehecking on the IP address. Carolyn I highly doubt you are the only person on this thread that is Asian. Seriously. I was involved with someone is Asian for a number of years, so much for your accusations.

  88. Carolyn Marbry

    So who were you talking to, then? You must have said it for a reason. So humor me and clarify what you meant. Let’s hear it. I’m sure Paulie and LG would love to know, too, as would whichever “Asian Lady” you were talking to.

    Or are you planning to backpedal some more?

  89. to carolyn

    What exactly are you talking about? You are really not making any sense.

  90. asian girl

    I am taking referring to me, I am asian, I don’t know you Carolyn and I never spoke to you on the phone. I just say what I said Carolyn, you seem not a nice person.

  91. Michael Seebeck

    Matt @61: OK, now I need therapy for that picture!

    Actually, the top hat and tails outfit was fine except Starchild forgot the wing-tips.

    BTW, I wore a suit & tie on the floor too, and I’m no GOP-lite–you’d never see them caught dead in a white necktie! I coulda wore my tie-dye stuff, but then I might have become the focus of attention, and that’s not my style.

    Tom B. is right–suits and ties, like all other clothing, is a costume we wear to present ourselves in some manner to the rest of the world. That ain’t gonna change, either, unless we hold a convention totally in the nude (Gods help us and C-SPAN if we ever do that!). That’s why I don’t give a damn about what people wear to these things anymore–what they do and how they are is much more telling of their character than what costume they have on.

  92. Michael Seebeck

    OK, folks, enough of this.

    1. I’ve seen Starchild in a suit and tie. He actually wore one to the LPCA 2005 convention and he startled everyone with it because it was so not…him–especially after he was there the day before in a bathrobe and slippers.
    2. Carolyn is a nice person. She’s also her own person smart as all get out and tough as nails. Known that for years. 🙂
    3. LG is indeed a shameless flirt. If she flirts with me, and she has (see my Facebook album) she’s either blind or shameless, and she ain’t blind. 🙂
    4. If people are so fucking scared of Starchild’s attire that they are afraid to join the LP, then by all means, let ’em join the Prude Patrol in the GOP. I may disagree with quite a bit of his point of views on things, but you’ll never hear me say anything against his attire.

  93. Brian Holtz

    I’ve never EVER seen X act less than responsibly around kids. He’s kind, gentle, thoughtful, circumspect. […] how about “judge not that ye be not judged,” out of the book of Matthew?

    I’m sorry, but I just couldn’t let this irony pass without noting it. I don’t see how that constitutes dragging Matt’s name through the mud. On the contrary, the only person who has defended Matt’s name more strenuously than I have is … Starchild.

    Defending the sartorial choices of a Starchild is easy. Defending the due-process rights of a Barnes is a lot harder, but such rights mean nothing if they aren’t defended for those accused of the indefensible.

    Starchild gets that. That’s why he speaks out against e.g. the involuntary “civil commitment” of sex offenders who have already served their entire sentences — an unconscionable policy that was upheld last month in U.S. v. Comstock.

    We need more Libertarians with the courage of Starchild — a courage that has nothing to do with wearing butterfly wings.

    P.S. Speaking of mud: Barnes was indeed accused of “lying” to the ExCom, but the accusation turned out to be just that he violated an “understanding” floating in the air of a 3-person private phone conversation, carrying what Collier alleged was the “implication” that resigning from LPCA’s ExCom meant never accepting county office even if his record were disclosed.

  94. LibertarianGirl

    Im so glad I promised I wouldnt speak on the you know what situation anymore , and that I intend to keep that promise , or I’d have alot to say !:) yay for me….
    if there anything I personally realized this last convention, it’s that there was a roomful of awesome people , from every faction , group whatever , and I didnt get to spend time with nearly enuf of them!

    who’s comin to FreedomFest??

  95. paulie Post author

    who’s comin to FreedomFest??

    I’ll see if I can afford it. Does UNLV or the community college have much of a summer session? I might work MPP’s thing for a few days (even at the crap rate) just to pay for the trip. Maybe.

  96. paulie Post author

    Starchild gets that. That’s why he speaks out against e.g. the involuntary “civil commitment” of sex offenders who have already served their entire sentences — an unconscionable policy that was upheld last month in U.S. v. Comstock.

    We need more Libertarians with the courage of Starchild — a courage that has nothing to do with wearing butterfly wings.

    I agree.

  97. paulie Post author

    BTW, I wore a suit & tie on the floor too, and I’m no GOP-lite–you’d never see them caught dead in a white necktie!

    It’s all about the mullet 🙂

    (And yes…I used to have one too…back in the day)

    Google image search: mullet

  98. paulie Post author

    Cool….I may kick it there for a week or two esp if I’m out west already, which looks likely. Can you take care of picking up paper, turning it in and cashing checks?

  99. Untamed smells

    With the dearth of good well cut mullets in the LP I present this guide graphically represented in hopes that those in trailer parks who were unable to gain a high school diploma (even those in California’s Valley of the Dirt People) can follow.

    Tip number one: Do not use the same shears on your husbands head as you do the dogs’… or at least clean the blades first.

    http://epicurienne.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/mullet1.gif

    An inspirational anthem:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_RXZ_sRKE0

    If we are diligent, we can raise the professional image of the LP.

  100. Shawn Levasseur

    @73

    This “he should dress professionally” nonsense is just as hypocritical and just as in-your-face ironic as the Libertarian party convention, the only place in the world where Libertarians are 100% free to govern themselves their own way, being absolutely straitjacketed by Roberts Rules of Order and parliamentarian high priests.

    How are Robert’s Rules a “straitjacket”?

    What should we be using?

    Make the rules up as we go? The convention will become one big game of Calvinball.

    Should we create a whole manual of meeting rules from scratch? We take so long in debating what bylaws and rule changes we have already, that we’d spend an entire convention’s worth of time arguing about what the meeting rules should be.

    The real problem is that people haven’t learned parliamentary prodecedure. This causes people to either not participate, or participate in a manner that causes delays.

    The only reason people see parliamentarians as “high priests” is their own lack of understanding, and intimidation in trying to learn about it.

    The biggest mistake people make is buying a copy of Robert’s Rules, and try reading it in it’s 700+ page length. That’s like trying to learn English by reading the dictionary from cover to cover

    The FAR slimmer “Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised , IN BRIEF” written by the authors of the full edition, Is a much better learning tool. 80% of what you need is in there. It’s a very good learning tool. And can help you use the bigger book as a reference, when needed.

    The remaining 20% of the problem is resolved by reading our own convention rules and bylaws. So many of the problems at the convention came about by members not knowing the procedures clearly spelled out in the convention rules.

    Meeting rules are only a tool of “high priests” when members don’t seek to understand them.

  101. Leslie Sherman

    I am tired of people claiming that they have the right to do whatever they want simply because they want to do it and screaming about the consequences.

    For example – there are laws. If someone knowingly and intentionally breaks the law, they have to be prepared to pay the consequences. Most of our laws are there for a reason. Granted some have lost their validity over time, some are obsolete (how many times do you think folks have really tried to shoot cattle from horseback in downtown Los Angeles in the past 100 years?), some are just plain bad. As citizens we really do not have the right to pick and choose which laws we will or won’t obey. If you do not like a law, you absolutely have the right to fight to have it repealed, changed, rewritten etc, but you absolutely do not have the right to break it without consequence.

    There are unwritten but equally binding laws regarding how we treat others. Today’s society is all about ME and we are teaching this to our children. There is no responsibility for one’s actions, no consideration for the next person, no consequences for the people who trample on others to demand their “rights”. As long as I get what I want, as long as I can do or say whatever I want, as long as it is all about ME, nothing and no one else matters. And if anyone dares to say No to me or indicate in any way that they disapprove or that I may have done wrong, all I have to do is point my finger and shout “Bigot”, or “Racist” or “Homophobe” and that gives me all the justification I need. Bull!!

    I am just so tired of these selfish children demanding that I respect their rights and their lifestyle and their values while they trample all over mine and call me names. Maybe this is why I have such trouble with the liberals on the left and many of the Libertarians. Everyone has the right to live the way they want. I have the right not to be bothered by them.

    Another thought: so Starchild is a popular speaker. Great for him. The concept of consenting adults comes to mind. Did he ask the attendees if they were in anyway offended or put ill-at-ease by his “performance”? If even one objected, he violated their right to consent by continuing. By performing as he did, the attendees had options: they could sit silently and allow it to continue for the sake of political correctness and give passive consent (legally, silence does imply consent); they could object and be labeled as UnLibertarian by those who stayed; they could walk out; they could give active consent by agreeing with him and cheering him on. Unless it was fully disclosed to the attendees as to just what was going to happen so that they could decide on their own whether or not to attend this particular event, they lost their right to give consent. So WRONG.

    An old saying but true: evil happens when good men stay silent.

    I understand the point that was being made; I just don’t care anymore. Had I been there, I would have walked out and demanded that the party reimburse me for all my expenses (hotel, food, airfare, parking, rental car, any new clothes I had purchased exclusively for the occasion. Etc – and possibly for my wasted time as well)

    Unprofessional does not come close.

  102. LibertarianGirl

    L_Did he ask the attendees if they were in anyway offended or put ill-at-ease by his “performance”? If even one objected, he violated their right to consent by continuing. By performing as he did,

    me_ what performance are you talking about ? he didnt perform anything , he dressed unusual , period. he manner , speaking and interactions with others is ALWAYS polite , respectful and intelligent .
    are you seriously saying that if one person objects to one others dress , they are violating consent?

    thats ridiculous , if that were true , we would all be violating eachother all the time.

  103. LibertarianGirl

    L_An old saying but true: evil happens when good men stay silent.

    me_ oh my , this statement says everything about your character . not forbidding someone to dress a certain way doesn’t even come close to being evil , but thinking that someones dress is certainly qualifies.

  104. LibertarianGirl

    L_Had I been there, I would have walked out and demanded that the party reimburse me for all my expenses (hotel, food, airfare, parking, rental car, any new clothes I had purchased exclusively for the occasion. Etc – and possibly for my wasted time as well)

    me_ ROFLMAO , and you would have promptly been denied , and had you went to court you’d have been laughed out. so- freakin-ridiculous…ROFL

  105. Leslie Sherman

    I will start out by saying I am not a blogger, but after observing this website for some time when it was pointed out to me; I thought I would say this, then move on.

    I have to agree with the all about me concept. Some of the radicals here seems to think they are the only ones of certain nationality or backgrounds that come on here, very quick to accuse or blame. I wonder how many actually have talked to the people they make comments about to find out what really happened. I wonder how many of the people here switch things around after talking to the individual they make comments about and stab them in the back. When talking among yourselves when your off this site. I wonder how many people here are on drugs or alcohol who minds are screwed up. Oh that’s right, you can do that, but then you wonder why people start avoiding you only to be cordial if necessary, upon contact of some sort with you. Should I make it obvious to name names or are you smart enough to figure it out.
    I have known people that act one way when blogging, and act different either in person or personal emails. It is apparent that some of the people don’t realize they are doing harm more to themselves and a lot of people who may or may not post on here see this. I have to agree, maybe with good reason that Carolyn didn’t get elected. Maybe good reason Mr. Milnes says what he says about the libertarian party…

    I can look at Libertarian Girl and consider the source.

    In the workplace people can make one call and turn it into a basket case.

    This website is a big joke.

    Wouldn’t surprise me if some of the people here end up with a shoe in their mouth in the end.

    Good Day. No I will not be reading or wasting my time any further with this website as I have seen enough.

  106. John H.

    I too feel that a “circus” cannot be taken seriously.

    I do understand that people at conventions say/do/act/dress/etc in a manner they might not ordinarily do. BUT I would not want to have him elected to represent me.

  107. Lisa an activist

    @138 I am glad you are very sure about that. People have sued over Mc Donald coffee and won lawsuits. Guess your a very stupid person.

  108. Brian Holtz

    Leslie Sherman: “I have the right not to be bothered by them.”

    On your own property, yes. Elsewhere, you just have the right to be free from fraud and initiated force — though you may also enjoy (or suffer) whatever no-bothering rules the landholder institutes.

  109. Thomas L. Knapp

    John,

    You write:

    “I do understand that people at conventions say/do/act/dress/etc in a manner they might not ordinarily do.”

    Yes, some of them do.

    My impression, however, is that Starchild doesn’t just dress the way he dresses for conventions. As far as what he says/acts/does, he’s well-spoken, polite, makes his points when he is recognized, and isn’t nearly as disruptive as some of the assholes (all wearing suits and power-ties) who think that they own the floor.

    “I would not want to have him elected to represent me.”

    And if you’re a member of the California LP, presumably your vote counts on that issue.

    Lisa,

    No, you’re not entitled to be reimbursed for your expenses if you choose to attend a convention and then decide you didn’t like how someone there was dressed.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

  110. LibertarianGirl

    good , move on , we have enuf bigots that bl0g here , and no Im not stupid , and no you dont know me , so BYE BYE , you coudnt win a debate with me if i was high on drugs , so dont let the door hit you in the ass:)

  111. Carolyn Marbry

    @134, Roberts Rules in and of themselves are not a straitjacket. It’s how they’re used.

  112. Carolyn Marbry

    I wouldn’t necessarily call Leslie Sherman a bigot. There’s not enough here to make that judgment. But I’m sure that if Starchild’s apparel offended Sherman, our discourse here is likely doing the same. Can’t be helped, I suppose.

    I will say this, though. If in order to gain Sherman’s support I would have needed to condemn Starchild in ANY way and support giving refunds to the easily offended, I’m not heartbroken to have lost that support.

    If on the other hand Sherman believes Mark Rutherford, my opponent, would have condemned Starchild or supported giving refunds to the easily offended, Sherman would likely have been disappointed by him, as well. I’d sure like to think so since I have a lot of respect for Rutherford as a Libertarian.

  113. John W. Wade

    HAAA HAAAA!!!! ROFL!!!! This party should change it’s name to The Granola Party. Nuts, fruits and flakes.
    Libertarian is a freaking HO and some of us do know you, your a stupid ass. Why don’t you go back and correct your blog, for someone who says they are not stupid your are right, the correct term is moron, and your certainly show it, in more ways than one. LOL. Look at your blog at #144. Ask an English teacher to help you since you don’t know your ass from a hole in the ground. I don’t believe anyone can be bothered to debate with a person who is soo stupid, they don’t know that they are stupid.
    Starchild is a prancing freaking fairy.
    Carolyn, you can do whatever you FEEEEL, you lower yourself to hang around the same peas in a pod, as well as act like them.
    Maybe I should come to the Libertarian Convention with a group of my friends, we can all dress in straight jackets, D&S costumes,% te and Submission) for those who don’t know). Bonnets, diapers and a bottle.
    WAAA, WAAAA,…….

  114. Carolyn Marbry

    @134, one of the most disruptive people in the entire convention was one who uses RONR as a bludgeon, so no, it’s not a lack of familiarity with it that causes the problems.

    You apparently missed out on the battle over floor fees in which this same individual used the vagaries of parliamentary procedure and his pet parliamentarian to try to override what was in the by-laws, and then, thwarted in that attempt, tried to get a ruling from THE Robert on it. Ultimately, those of us who believed the state parties alone held the right to impose restrictions on delegates prevailed.

    It’s not a lack of familiarity with Roberts at all that’s the problem. It’s the tendency of people who know RONR very well to use it to silence others (like calling the question immediately after making a lengthy speech to support one’s own side during a supposed “point of information,” for example) that uses the letter of the law to defeat the spirit of the law.

    As to the high priesthood, tell me why it is that the chair of the national party needed two parliamentarians seated next to him during the entire convention, neither of whom was particularly helpful with keeping us on agenda or stopping these abuses. Because they were “professional registered parliamentarians,” the chair was not confident enough in his own judgment either to disagree with them or to chair the meeting without them.

    THAT is the reliance on a high priesthood that I’m talking about. As I said, no problem with using RONR as a loose fitting blazer to keep the meeting on track, on agenda, and to keep people from abusing the floor. But when it becomes a straitjacket or when it actually contributes to the problems, then it’s time to look at how we’re using it.

  115. LibertarianGirl

    whats even more ridiculous is when people at County ExCom meetings are RONR nazi’s . Im always fond of saying ( and almost always shut down)-“who the hell is Robert and why is he in charge of our meetings” – i mean we’re talking about meetings with 5-10 people , even our conventions only get around 35. In small groups like that , I think courtesy and common sense are enuf to guide us , but no , oh no even still RONR leads the way everytime —*sigh*

  116. LibertarianGirl

    John Wade // Jun 17, 2010 at 6:58 pm

    I am adding a correct. Libertarian is a feaking HO.

    149John Wade // Jun 17, 2010 at 7:01 pm

    Adding to my 147. Libertarian is a freaking HO.

    150John Wade // Jun 17, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    Libertarian , is whom I am referring to. Last time to try for this post.

    151John Wade // Jun 17, 2010 at 7:03 pm

    Ok this is for #144 HO

    me_ ROFL , are you trying to call me a HO?
    4 tries to get it right? oh my, it took me forever to figure out what you were saying , in the future when you want to chat , debate , hurl insults , the name is LG for short , when you say Libertarian we don’tmknow who ur talkin ahout Sherlock .
    OR like you did with your 4th try use the # of the poster u wish to insult.

  117. Guess your not computer literate

    If I didn’t know any better, I would say the person had trouble with his posting, computer problems maybe. I know I figured that out because that what it looks like, I am sure other people figured that out. I guess Libertarian Girl doesn’t know much about computers either to be able to figure that out.

  118. Michael H. Wilson

    Carolyn @ 154 wrote “(like calling the question immediately after making a lengthy speech to support one’s own side during a supposed “point of information,” for example).

    Carolyn I have seen that happen and been told that doing that is not acceptable. If you are recognized for a point of information, or to give a speech then that is what you get to do. Adding on to that with a “Call the Question” is not acceptable. Basically you get one shot and the turn goes to the next person. And I have heard people holler out “call the question” and then seen them recognized right away by the Chair or Parliamentarian. If I recall, and I don’t have Robert’s nearby to check, but you have to be recognized in turn. You don’t jump the line because you holler out “Call the Question”.

    Too often as LG pointed out Robert’s is abused to shut off debate.

  119. Michael H. Wilson

    The LP needs to develop its own simplified set of rules for conducting a meeting and get rid of Roberts.

    Its some what weird of the LP to use Robert’s given our philosophy.

  120. LibertarianGirl

    Mel_Guess your not computer literate // Jun 18, 2010 at 4:47 pm

    If I didn’t know any better, I would say the person had trouble with his posting, computer problems

    me_ I WOULD say that if the posts said the same thing , but they are all different which tells me they tried to pinpoint me 3 times , realized not even they could tell who they were talking about and then nailed it the 4th time.

  121. Carolyn Marbry

    LG @ 154 and MHW @ 15 and 158, exactly.

    All too often, people assume that if you say you don’t like the way RONR gets used, you’re saying you don’t LIKE RONR for running meetings and/or that you don’t understand how it works.

    Nope. It’s that every two years, we get the opportunity to show the world a “society” being our convention that is entirely made up of Libertarians, and we get to show them exactly how that society should work.

    And what do we show them? A convention that’s completely rule-bound by Roberts, presided over by someone whose leash is held by (usually non-party) parliamentarian, where some people are intimidated out of speaking and a handful are using the arcana of the rules to silence those with whom they disagree.

    If that’s truly how we would run a Libertarian society, then maybe society really is better off with the Dems and Reps.

  122. Robert Capozzi

    cm, no fan per se of Roberts here, but then the LP has been hamstrung by many things in the 70s-written-largely-in-stone, fossilized Bylaws and SoP.

    I seriously doubt many outsiders, if any, make a judgment about the LP based on our hyper-technical machinations in convention. They are FAR more likely to make a judgment about extremist rhetoric they might happen on in some of our written materials and from some of our candidates.

    But, your proposition could be correct, certainly. Please present some evidence that many who’ve considered the LP have turned away based on our hyper-technical conventions.

  123. Much appreciated Please

    @159. My request is that I prefer you leave my name off a public posting.

    Thank you.

  124. Too old for this

    If you can’t figure out that the insults are not coming from me, I am sorry I cannot help you. As far as your games, not interested in playing

  125. Carolyn Marbry

    Capozzi@161 says, “But, your proposition could be correct, certainly.”

    What proposition? I made an observation, or rather many observations formulated by having visited many state conventions and seen Roberts used at some the “correct” way, to move party business along and to allow the maximum participation, and at others the “incorrect” way as a bludgeon by some to intimidate others out of speaking at all. National’s use has been more to the latter.

    I’m not blaming the former chair for intimidating others out of speaking. Not at all. I’m displeased that, thanks to the parliamentarian letter-of-the-law vs. spirit-of-the-law mentality that had a high priest holding his leash and paying more attention to whether a thing CAN be done than to whether it SHOULD, he allowed it.

  126. Robert Capozzi

    cm, the proposition you made in 160 was, “If that’s truly how we would run a Libertarian society, then maybe society really is better off with the Dems and Reps.”

    And you made another proposition: “It’s that every two years, we get the opportunity to show the world a “society” being our convention that is entirely made up of Libertarians, and we get to show them exactly how that society should work.”

    I would say that the LP only attracts the tiniest of slivers of the L population, so the jury is out as to whether Ls COULD actually manage a government. I understand we’ve had mayors of VERY small towns, like Big Water, UT, but for the most part, elected Ls have been few and far between.

    How a convention is run may or may not be illustrative of how a government might be managed, IMO. My take is that the precedent was set in the 70s, when many in the LP were under the philosophical sway of an insane person, M.N. Rothbard. Much of the dysfunction you observe can be traced to his bizarre ideas about what a L is and how a L party should be organized. He and his cadre installed a lot of traps in the foundational documents that all but ensure the LP remains small and contentious.

  127. Carolyn Marbry

    @166, fair enough, although again, I see those as observations more than propositions, but a rose by any other name, tomato, tomato, whatever.

    Can you point to specific examples of the dysfunction you attribute to Rothbard and the traps in the foundational docs? I was not in the party in the 70s, so I did not get to witness any of this and cannot judge it firsthand. But I know a lot of people who were whom I can ask about it.

  128. LibertarianGirl

    the only rule that HAS to be in place at LP events/conventions is TIME LIMITS FOR SPEAKING AND DEBATE! ROFL
    otherwise we would never shut up , never….

  129. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I would say that the LP only attracts the tiniest of slivers of the L population, so the jury is out as to whether Ls COULD actually manage a government. I understand we’ve had mayors of VERY small towns, like Big Water, UT, but for the most part, elected Ls have been few and far between.”

    The LP also has or has had mayors of mid-size cities (Bellflower, California, population ~70k).

    And multiple council/board members of mid-size cities (Springfield, Missouri, population ~150k).

    And council members of fairly large cities (Indianapolis, Indiana, population ~800k).

    And council members of very large cities (New York, New York, population ~8.3 million).

    Of those four, the only one which is not current is Bellflower (Art Olivier used to be mayor there).

  130. Michael H. Wilson

    RC @ 166 writes; “How a convention is run may or may not be illustrative of how a government might be managed, IMO.”

    MW replies: Simply treating people with some degree of respect is a start.

    RC: “My take is that the precedent was set in the 70s, when many in the LP were under the philosophical sway of an insane person, M.N. Rothbard”.

    MW replies: Calling Rothbard insane is an example of not respecting others and is not true.

  131. Robert Capozzi

    cm, perhaps it’s a linguistical difference that matters very little. To me, an observation is a fact…the sky is blue. A proposition is an assemblage of facts and a conclusion…the accident rate on the roads is much lower on days with blue sky, so blue skies are both beautiful and safer.

    The 7/8ths protection of the SoP is an example of 70s-created dysfunction. The arrogance of those who put that in place is mindboggling to me.

  132. Robert Capozzi

    mhw 170, sorry, I hold to the proposition that the human condition is one of insanity. There do seem to be gradations of insanity, however. Your “average” Joe or Jane who goes to work everyday, has a mortgage, doesn’t kick the dog, takes a nice vacation now and then present as low-grade lunatics. Perhaps they have minor phobias about bugs.

    Rothbard, OTOH, had a colossal intellect that, by all indications, he wanted to share his thought system with humanity. Good for him, I say. However, this is a man who sought to influence the “intellectual” class and yet would write loopy stuff like fetuses are “parasites.” A moment’s reflection by a sane mind would see how absurd that position was/is on most levels, although he was correct in the sense that a parasite often attaches itself to the host. Proto-human fetuses do that, too.

    Or read his newsletters from about 1980 til his death. I would be VERY surprised that a fair-minded reader would not conclude that MNR was a VERY angry man, with flights of paranoia, conspiracy-mongering, etc. I find his opinions about various forms of absolutism profoundly dysfunctional.

    Still, having met and talked with and seen MNR speak, he was hard not to like when he was on his best (most civilized) behavior. He could be endearing and amusing.

    Just because we’re all daft doesn’t mean we can’t be lovable!

  133. Thomas L. Knapp

    ——
    dysfunctional, adj. 1. impaired in function; especially of a bodily system or organ. [WordNet 1.5] 2. (Psychol.) failing to serve an adjustive purpose; — of a trait or condition; as, dysfunctional behavior.
    —-

    Has it ever occurred to you that rather than being “dysfunctional,” Rothbard (or those who put the 7/8ths amendment requirement on the SOP) simply had different functions on their minds than happen to be on your mind?

    I agree that things like sniffing “contra-indicated” at all proposals to actually reduce the size scope or power of government instead of just fucking around with the arrangement of pieces on the game board, or fretting about paranoid imaginings like “silo abandonment” are “functions,” but they seem to me very likely to be “functions” that not many people are interested in pursuing; “dysfunctionality” relative to them is not necessarily a vice.

  134. Robert Capozzi

    tk, yes, yes it has.

    Every day.

    It could be that Rothbard and his adherents in fact cracked the code, and those of us who disagree with deontological absolutism and abolitionism are the dysfunctional ones.

    But, since everything tells me we live in a relativistic world in which we need to persuade large numbers to agree that the State is too large, I’ll continue along this path until I see a good reason to make an adjustment, like the adjustment I made when I escaped the Rothbardian Matrix pod! Could be that my red pill is actually blue, but I assure you of my sincerest belief that mine’s red.

    I don’t recall Murray or Ayn ever admitting that they might be mistaken in their assumptions.

    That alone should be a red flag for the reflective….

  135. Robert Capozzi

    tk: I agree that things like sniffing “contra-indicated” at all proposals to actually reduce the size scope or power of government instead of just fucking around with the arrangement of pieces on the game board…

    me: Hmm, is this directed at little old me? I favor reducing the size, scope and power of government, so I’m feeling woefully misunderstood. Perhaps you’ve misunderstood my view that abolishing all government tomorrow is a) very risky and possibly/probably MORE dysfunctional than the current state of affairs; b) not going to happen; c) not persuasive to most voters; and therefore d) contra-indicated on any meaningful level I can think of. IMO.

    Clearer?

  136. Robert Capozzi

    more…tk, you might contemplate your words, “…proposals to actually reduce the size scope or power of government…,” and consider what “actually” actually means.

    The soapbox lunatic may well advocate a reduction in government, but he/she may not be very effective in advancing his/her goals.

  137. Thomas L. Knapp

    “I favor reducing the size, scope and power of government”

    Name a single proposal for doing so in any way you which you haven’t labeled “contra-indicated.”

  138. LibertarianGirl

    RC_admitting that they might be mistaken in their assumptions.

    me- biggest character defect almost all Libs of every variety have. That and listening , Noone wants to give the others guys opinions any real thought. Even while peoples mouths are still moving , most libs are planning their rebuttal

  139. Robert Capozzi

    tk: Name a single proposal for doing so in any way you which you haven’t labeled “contra-indicated.”

    me: Since I favor reducing the State across the board, I can’t think of any. I am on record that advocating a 50% reduction in one year, or even four years, too fast, although I’d certainly be for abolishing any number of line items FASTER than that.

    Can you recall an instance where I advocating increasing the State’s size, scope or power? Surely I do advocate experimenting with shifts, like vouchers or taxing polluting.

    I’m for an overall reduction in the State. I believe the LP could be far more effective in ACTUALLY bringing that about were we more willing to engage the center where it is.

  140. Thomas L. Knapp

    Bob,

    I rest my case. You’re in favor of all reductions of the size, scope and power of the state except those which are specified, named, or described in detail, e.g. the actual ones.

  141. LibertarianGirl

    and i rest my case that everybodys right and nobody is wrong and nobody knows how to listen or understand , or for that matter even attempt to understand…

  142. Michael H. Wilson

    LG writes “me- biggest character defect almost all Libs of every variety have. That and listening , Noone wants to give the others guys opinions any real thought. Even while peoples mouths are still moving , most libs are planning their rebuttal”.

    That’s pretty much right on, but I hate to admit ;).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.