Our monthly open thread. Post news tips about alt parties and independent candidates, discuss any story that should be posted here but has not yet been posted, or even delve into completely off-topic stuff…just avoid quarantined thread subject matter and things that could get us and/or you into legal trouble such as threats, libel, and copyright infringement.
News tips can also be sent to the IPR writers who have chosen to make their contact info available at https://independentpoliticalreport.com/about/.
It’s also become an IPR tradition to post videos in the open threads. Here’s the latest from Juice Rap News, this time tackling the thorny issues of immigration, trade, corporatism, racism and Donald Trump:
Next, thanks to LNC Chair Nicholas Sarwark in IPR comments on a prior post, a meditation mantra for our modern age:
And last, to complete our triumvirate of videos for this most August of months (much as the original Augustus completed the Second Triumvirate with Mark Anthony and Marcus Lepidus), we have none other than Augustus Sol Invictus:
Someone else besides me please put up September…
Andy Jacobs commenting on “Matt Wright: Why I Won’t Vote for Just Any Libertarian” saying “This would take a bunch of Libertarian moving into a low population city/town or county, with the intent of taking it over.” I would mention the Constitutional County Project currently working on Navajo county. They have been putting in time talking to possible candidates.
http://www.constitutionalcountyproject.org/counties/arizona/navajo-county
https://www.facebook.com/ConstitutionalCountyProject
Update:
Just moved to a motel that has computers in the lobby, but it’s a huge motel and they have two of them, so I can’t stay on here a lot like I could on my own computer. Technically it says 15 minutes, I don’t think they will be quite that strict but I do need to make sure I am not preventing other guests from using it. Still best to reach me by phone for now. Will order something soon.
Thanks to several people I have enough money to order a computer, and several good suggestions on what to get. I will try to order one in the next couple of days.
Someone from Examiner conducted an LP Presidential poll yesterday, and published results today.
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-presidential-poll-shows-libertarians-want-gary-johnson-to-enter-the-race
Although NOTA won with 19.2 percent of the vote total, Marc Feldman received 18.6 percent of the vote, Steve Kerbel with 16.4 percent, Darryl Perry with 15 percent, Cecil Ince with 13 percent, Derrick Michael Reid with 9.1 percent and Joy Waymire with 8.7 percent.
Lastly, the poll asked the question of respondents that if the presidential election was held today (August 30, 2015), for whom would they vote. Of the three candidates listed, Gary Johnson received 69 percent of the vote total, Republican Rand Paul received 13 percent and Democrat Bernie Sanders received 2 percent. 16 percent of the respondents offered their own scenario with suggestions like Donald Trump, R. Lee Wrights, NOTA, Ted Cruz and a few would vote their own name for President of the United States.
It appears my computer was stolen last night. I don’t do internet on the phone so I will not be online nearly as much until I can get it replaced. Not sure when that will be since I don’t really have the money to buy another one. Borrowing Andy J.’s computer to post this. If anyone needs me for anything I will be easier to reach on my phone at 205-534-1622.
Enemies within the Republic
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/aug/29/west-point-professor-target-legal-critics-war-on-terror
https://burninggold.bandcamp.com/track/stone-special-release
Oy vey….
Jeb Bush: “I have libertarian blood in my veins!”
thelibertarianrepublic.com
Speaking to a crowd of Republicans, presidential candidate Jeb Bush attempted to convince the crowd …
Looks like Randal may be sitting at the kids table at the next debate……
http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/27/carly-fiorina-takes-rand-pauls-place-in
Carly Fiorina Takes Rand Paul’s Place in Republican Top 10
But Donald Trump continues to dominate the GOP field, with Ben Carson capturing second place.
Elizabeth Nolan Brown|Aug. 27, 2015 1:25 pm
Thank you!
Jill Pyeatt wrote:
Happy birthday, Nick and Richard!!
One of the big downsides of leaving Facebook is I don’t get birthday reminders anymore and don’t wish people happy birthday every day. Sorry about that, everyone whose birthdays I miss.
Wow, that’s quite a coincidence.
Salud!
There are two very special birthdays today! Happy birthday to Nicholas Sarwark and Richard Winger!!!
Hey… since Darrell was nominated on the third ballot is there a need for a convention? Look at all the money and bad feelings it will save! 😉
Here’s a Libertarian Party Presidential candidate poll using IRV
http://www.demochoice.org/dcballot.php?poll=LP2016
There are photo-conversion programs that claim they can make photos straight, but the practice is highly controversial.
Is there a way to straighten the photos?
That’s a typo from a deletion. I’ll ask to have it corrected.
Good point, Chuck.
From the LP blog post:
It seems odd to throw out that factoid, then only name one of them: Gary Johnson.
Is the other Jesse Ventura? Or Rand Paul?
FYI: http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/feldman-perry-kerbel-running-for-lp-presidential-nomination
It should be obvious to all that we’ve had some of these people pop up on IPR over the years (that is paid government shills).
5 Things Shills Don’t Want You To Know
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sS9olPA2BK0
Here’s an interview I conducted with former IRS commissioner Mark Everson, the Republican presidential candidate who filed a complaint with the FEC when he was excluded from the August 6 debate.
https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_interviews_Mark_Everson,_U.S._Republican_Party_presidential_candidate
Infiltration: COINTELPRO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNcf3vEGWFg
What’s The ABCs of Liberty all about?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCGUzVIlRWU
Ron Paul: Donald Trump Is Part of the Problem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqJdd0uhQQI
Dunno who it is, but you could also try leaving it as a comment on that article.
Here’s an article I wrote earlier today about Leroy Pletten. http://amthirdpartyreport.com/2015/08/18/encounters-with-prohibition-party-activist-leroy-pletten/
To whoever deleted the ping, please reveal yourself and explain your reasoning. Thank you.
Here’s what I found after a quck search. The choking incident itself is not very clear at the start, the aftermath is what is mostly covered. I didn’t watch it all the way through now, although I have seen it before. I don’t know if another clip offers a clearer view, or forgot.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89YMq-omW7o
William, too bad! I was hoping you’d turn the whole mess into something funny!
Seriously, someone needs to write a follow-up article about what happened Saturday, but I think we need to wait a while to see if anything happens this week. Anyone is welcome to!
Jill,
I’m not writing anything about the Oregon situation at the moment. I just wanted to see the video because I thought it may be funny.
Ashtar Command Party. They will land when Kip Lee is inaugurated as President on January 20, 2017.
http://www.usparliament.org/kiplee2016.php
Whoah, stop the presses everyone. Kip Lee is running for President with the Ashtar Party. This is big news!
Why the CPD 15% rule is absurd…Hey, you can see it worked brilliantly 90% of the time.
Kip Lee at last report is now running with the Ashtar Party.
If you’re writing something up about Oregon, William, please post a link here or on the Oregon thread. I’m sure most of us would like to read it.
I’m sure Wes can provide the video for you, William. I know I’ve posted it here a couple times, but I don’t have time to wade through the 60 plus articles to find it.
I saw someone new yesterday who says he’s running for President via a FB post. I believe his name is Steven R. Kelly. I actually like some of his platform, although it’s not Libertarian. I sent him a message and he said he’s running as an Independent. I asked about his website, and he said he only had his FB page. I made the decision not to post anything here about him until he became more serious than a FB page.
Wow, I have been involved with and following the Libertarian Party for over 19 years, and even I do not know who some of the people are on the link Darryl Perry posted above that has declared candidates for the LP Presidential nomination. Sad state of affairs.
Here’s a poll with all declared LP Presidential candidates:
http://www.easypolls.net/poll.html?p=55d202c3e4b0c3d16faa5aa4
Is this video publicly available?
With all the gloom and doom on the ongoing Oregon fiasco over at another thread perhaps it’s time to consider what it would mean to have the Libertarian Party splinter into fragments or cease to exist completely. Exploring these possibilities might be therapeutic and help people gain a larger perspective rather than continue to engage in internecine warfare.
Digging through the Reform Party achieves, and scouring the internet, I found about 20 Reform Party related videos that have not been widely broadcasted in years. One of the things I’ve been trying to do as Secretary is make the historical records more widely available (when I have them) so I’ve posted them to the Reform Party of North Carolina Youtube account for public consumption. https://www.youtube.com/user/ReformPartyNC/videos
🙁
RIP
Me too!
I’m sad to say we’ve lost another great Libertarian yesterday…
From the Libertarian Party of Pinellas County:
“It is with deep sorrow that we inform you of the passing of our Vice Chair, Richard Paulus.
Richard was an integral part of our affiliate. He was a fixture at the Pepper Fest and Chili Blaze events. He made the best sriracha chili I had ever eaten. He loved to cook and his recipes were outstanding. He liked his food so hot, he needed to sign a waiver before ordering wings at Quaker Steak.
A devout member, he took pride in having a perfect meeting attendance record. He served on the Executive Committee multiple times with a deep commitment to Libertarian ideals.
He may have come across as a distinct personality but he truly cared about our affiliate and was proud of his contributions and accomplishments.
He will be missed. Please keep Bev in your thoughts. She will need some kindness and warmth sent her way.
https://lppinellas.wordpress.com/2015/02/21/meet-richard-paulus-vice-chair/ ”
Source: https://www.facebook.com/LPPinellas/photos/a.658109364210778.1073741829.194784887209897/977924312229280/?type=1&theater
Alex Snitker and his crew on the 1787 Network provided an impromptu eulogy for the late Mr. Paulus on the Liberty Underground Show: http://1787network.com/2015/08/liberty-underground-show-8142015/9026
RIP 1964-2015
RIP
Len Cich, longtime member of LP-Milwaukee Co. and Libertarian member of the Greenfield, WI School Board who was re-elected earlier this year, has passed away at age 75.
Announcement from Greenfield School Board:
http://www.greenfield.k12.wi.us/Portals/Greenfield/District/docs/School%20Board/Len%20Cich%20Passes%20Away.pdf
http://theantimedia.org/until-recently-there-was-no-such-thing-as-government-in-most-of-the-world/
Starchild writes
“I share your dismay at the condition of governance even in alternative parties that should know better. How is day-to-day governance of the Green Party going these days? There’s a committee of 300 or something, isn’t there? I haven’t checked recently.”
I’m not on that committee and I’m sad to say that I’m not even fully aware of how it works lol! And that’s pretty pathetic because I venture to guess that if I don’t know how it works, then the vast majority of registered Greens probably don’t know how it works. Information on how it works, is, in any case, not easily accessible online. I’d venture to guess that the only people who really know how it works is those who have served in the committee past and present, which is probably like 1000 or less.
I’m told that much of the voting process is done by email and there is plenty of time for deliberation on various motions and decisions. This beats the chaos of how some state executive committees do business via conference calls which invariably leads to on-the-spot decision-making absent sufficient deliberation, similar to state annual meetings (where, to be sure, many motions are posted via email prior to the meeting but most people have not read them).
Maybe I’m just a noob and I lack sufficient understanding of either human nature or how political decision-making works…..but mho is that we Greens have no excuse whatsoever for not having adopted direct delagative democracy (eg, liquid democracy, where members can delegate their voting authority to another member and revoke it at any time), along with plenty of built-in safeguards to ensure due deliberation and proper consensus for important decisions….. The Pirate Party in Germany have already developed the technology and essentially shown the way and consequently the statist media (owned by pretty much the same monied interests that own our media) went all out to discredit them..which imho shows that they were probably on to something. It seems to me that if new party members received a software package where they could get online and get started as voting and participating members of the party (where they could read and debate on various proposals and feel like part of a genuine democratic community and a movement towards real change) then membership would likely skyrocket. But as it is, Green members are decentralized into county groups as a matter of principle, and largely ignorant of the inner-workings of the state and national executive committees.
Paul said: “I think most of the actual Libertarian activists were volunteers or contractor, not employees per se.”
RED FLAG!
“I don’t know what the political views of most of the full time NSON staff are.”
RED FLAG!
“I know Joe Hunter did have that Romney sticker and has a history of working on Republican and conservative causes.”
RED FLAG!
“I’m not sure whether Ron is a genuine convert to libertarianism and/or long time latent libertarian; he says he is a libertarian so who am I to say?”
RED FLAG!
“A further difficulty here is who you define as a true libertarian activist and how genuine you take their views to be. Opinions may vary on that. So the short answer is I don’t know.”
Does the person in question have any verifiable record of libertarian activism, outside of when they are getting paid? If not, then this is a good sign that they are probably not a libertarian.
There are people out there who claim to be lots of things, but then it turns out that they are full of shit.
How does one become a black belt in jiu jitsu? One becomes a black belt in jiu jitsu when others who are black belts in jiu jitsu say that one is a black belt in jiu jitsu.
Would most people who are libertarian activists call somebody a libertarian? If so. the person in question is a libertarian.
I don’t through the term libertarian around lightly. One example is that there are only a few people involved in the world of petitioning who I’d say are libertarians. The rest are mostly apolitical mercenaries, and there are some with other political ideologies which are not libertarian.
A person can be libertarian leaning, or semi-libertarian, but this does not make them a libertarian.
I’ve heard some people use the three legged stool analogy, with one leg representing civil liberties, another leg representing economic freedom, and another leg representing a peaceful foreign policy.
I can usually tell from talking to somebody for a little while whether or not they are a libertarian.
Given my many years in being a political activist and working in the world of politics, I can usually spot the bullshitters from the actual libertarians within a pretty short period of time by observing their behavior and talking to them.
I think that it is pretty pathetic that we have to ask whether or not the campaign staff for our Presidential campaign are Libertarians are not, and that when this question is asked, all we get are vague answers.
We SHOULD already know that everybody working on our party’s Presidential campaign are actually Libertarians, because they should all have long, verifiable records as Libertarian activists.
If our candidate for President can’t put together a campaign staff made up of actual Libertarians with verifiable records as Libertarian activists, then we as a party ought to not give this person our party’s Presidential nomination.
Thank you Paulie. I appreciate that.
William Saturn – I added your link back to the A3PR story as a comment. Still don’t know who is deleting your pingbacks or why, but next time it happens, try leaving the link as an actual comment and not just a ping only also and let me know if anyone deletes your comment as well as the ping.
I love lists, and this particularly entertaining one was in my email this AM. I particularly enjoyed the one about Ted Cruz.
All the time. And escalates. Because he’s an insecure narcicist with no filter … certainly what we should look for in a president. Not!
Not very relevant, unless she runs for president and becomes a leading contender. And as Megyn Kelly correctly pointed out, O’Donnell is far from the only woman, or the only person, that Trump has gone after in a very ugly way (regardless of who started it – get off the kindergarten playground, already).
Correct. The spam filter has a setting that I could easily fix if I was still an admin here as I was in 2008-2013. That setting says how many links trigger a comment to be held up. It is currently set to two.
A lot of spam messages are characterized by mutiple links, but two seems to me to be setting it too low. Ideally, we should have someone who is here a lot like I am (not necessarily me but I could do it if I was allowed to) who can adjust this setting on as needed basis – say when we are getting a bunch of spam slip through throttle it down to a lower number, then raise it back up when the attack/filter malfunction subsides. Unfortunately, the current admins don’t monitor the site very actively, so their response time would be a lot slower and would in most cases depend on others emailing them since they rarely read the comments.
Warren and his brother Steve. But the thing is that they rarely read the comments here. Have you tried emailing them about this? If so, did they respond?
Unless/until they change the setting, yes.
Yep. Flame wars will not play well when dealing with congress and foreign leaders, etc.
Haven’t checked my email in a few hours. I’ll see if I find it next time I do.
Neither silly nor late. There are varying degrees of both, as I am sure you know. Trade wars have a nasty history of leading to actual wars, and there are a lot of countries the US is not at war with yet. That may change if Mr. Trump is ever to occupy the oval office. Domestic tyranny is also a mater of degree. Trump’s autocratic style would point towards “much more, at a much faster rate.”
Pointing out his own words is an attack…yeah right. And all those other attacks he has made agains all those other people, all just counter attacks. Yeah right. Why does everyone pick on poor (hah!) little Mr. Trump? It’s so unfair. And to think he has never said or done anything bad in his whole life to anyone….
Lead to war…that’s somewhat silly. We’re already bombing a fair piece of the world. Domestic tyranny? It’s a bit alte to worry that might start.
That polling misses to what extent the remaining majority that did not see him as the winner of the debate find him to be absolutely unacceptable, and to what extent that did or did not change.
A plurality of supporters won’t make him the nominee if most of the supporters of all the myriad other candidates find him to be the worst. Thus, a polarizing candidate can be first among ten with 20-something percent, but if he were, say, everyone else’s absolute last choice I don’t see how he can win, if that does not change. Even if he’s only among the last few choices for most but not all of the remaining 70-something percent that still does not bode well for him in actually getting the nomination.
To take a similar example, the last time you ran for LNC chair I helped conduct what turned out to be a very accurate poll of delegates. Mr. Root was the plurality choice of the largest numbers of delegates, but as various candidates were eliminated in subsequent rounds of voting the votes accrued to candidates who were not Mr. Root. In the end, Mr. Hinkle was elected, even though he was not the first choice of the largest number of delegates when there were IIRC five candidates running.
Obviously, the debate was not the breakout performance to rescue the rapidly sinking Randall Paul campaign that he hoped for; attacking Trump and Christie did not pay off for him, although it did give him a larger share of post-debate coverage especially given that he had the least amount of speaking time of any candidate in the debate.
I have sent several IPR people the full LfA files as an RTF, that might even be readable if it were posted. Alternatively, you can all get the PDF at LibertyForAmerica DOT com.
That’s basically been his message with this campaign. It’s a dangerous message, and likely to lead to war and domestic tyranny if allowed to be implemented.
Correct. Also on immigrants, etc.
I don’t know whether it was meant to or not, but I think it did show him to be all those things to a lot of people, many of whom did not realize it before then or just did not realize the extent to which he is all those things, and some of whom were prior to that his supporters. The only part I don’t fuly agree with is that he is just another politician. Obviously he’s a bit different than most politicians. But if what is meant by just another politician is just another squirming, lying, opportunistic sack of shit, he is clearly all that and then some – just more openly arrogant, hateful and prejudiced, because he can afford to be.
At least some polls show that more people thought he won the debate than any other candidate. The one that I saw said 28%. That leaves 72% who think someone else won the debate, and the poll does not tell you how many of those 72% were absolutely disgusted with Trump, or how many of them previously had a neutral or favorable opinion of him. I did not see enough of the Luntz discussion to see if any of it contradicted any of that. What I did see was several previous Trump fans who were not happy with his performance. I have a hard time imagining how his antics in the debate could have won him any new fans, much less his hateful foam filled mouth spasms the next day.
See the videos above as to why her subsequent denials and endorsements (filtered through Trump’s lawyers as all her public comments about him now have to be as part of their settlement deal by which she gets to remain a multi-millionaire) are less credible than her initial report on the matter.
I think the initial plan was to have the discussion but not as part of a formal, public LNC meeting. I am glad they amended that.
You’re welcome and you are quite correct.
There’s all kinds of resentment and prejudice out there among many, many people – gender, race/nationality/ethnicity, sexual orientation, looks, weight, religion, income, etc, etc.
Anyone who think any kind of prejudice on any of these issues has become rare is mistaken.
None of this is new, of course.
It’s become less acceptable to express some of this prejudice openly, but it’s a mistake to, as Trump says, presume that the only problem is “political correctness,” as if the underlying prejudice is itself not a problem, just fine, good and proper and just needs to be unshackled from the burdens of meeting with public disapproval.
It is when there is ample evidence that he does, some of that evidence being included in the question.
I don’t know if Trump has priests officiate his various weddings, but that would be an appropriate question to ask him, since there is good evidence that he has done it before.
At which point Mr. Trump would ramble and not really answer the question, as he did to several such questions in the course of the debate. I think the questions asked were entirely appropriate in his case.
Scary thought!
I think most of the actual Libertarian activists were volunteers or contractor, not employees per se. I don’t know what the political views of most of the full time NSON staff are. I know Joe Hunter did have that Romney sticker and has a history of working on Republican and conservative causes. I’m not sure whether Ron is a genuine convert to libertarianism and/or long time latent libertarian; he says he is a libertarian so who am I to say? I don’t know who you define as an employee – for example Joe Buchman was a contractor, but was he an employee? He lives in Utah so I think he did spend some time in the office, but I think he worked from home most of the time. A few people got paid, I understand not very much, to drive several Johnson vans all over the country. Do you define those as employees?
A further difficulty here is who you define as a true libertarian activist and how genuine you take their views to be. Opinions may vary on that. So the short answer is I don’t know.
In fact I am not sure if anyone can really answer your question.
As for being mercenaries…contrary to what you might gather from FEC reports, most people made chicken scratch. Nielson says he lost money (he will get it some day in theory, but almos certainly not n reality). I know a lot of people worked very long hours. I think all or most of them could have made more money if they applied that kind of effort to other pursuits.
Agreed with Phillies with many of the strengths, weaknesses, opportnities and threats he notes near the end of http://libertyforamerica.com/201508.pdf
Disagreed strongly about the office purchase and the need to have HQ be in the DC area, for reasons I explained at length in past threads.
That concludes my analysis of the most recent LfA on first read.
Thank you as always for the interesting newsletter; as you can see we agree o some of it and disagree on some, as usual.
Who on Gary Johnson’s campaign staff was actually a Libertarian activist, and who all there were just mercenaries out to make money?
It is not accurate that the vote was 9-0. The error is not n the part of Dr. Phillies, but rather on the part of LSLA secretary Jason Weinman.
I became LSLA treasurer at that very same phone meeting. I note n passing that I have still not received any access or information to keep any books for the organizatin after several weeks.
In any case when this motion came up I asked that the committee consider alternative – allowing the other people on the list to only be able to read the list but not post to it, to address the concern expressed by many state chairs about non-chairs cluttering the list with messages as well as engaging in flame wars on the list. I proposed that at the very least LNC members and national office staff be allowed to keep read only access to the list because they may find the feedback from state chairs to be valuable. This amendment was at first seconded by Beth Vest. However Chair Hildebrand of Texas, the maker of the original motion, said he would prefer that the state chairs have a place to talk out of the view of various others – he mentoned Mr. Benedict and Mr. Sarwark by name, I believe, although I did not take him to mean only them. His argument must have been convincing, as everyone was voting against my amendment including the seconder Ms.Vest who went on to say that Mr. Hildebrand’s argument changed her mind. At this point I withdrew the amendment so as not to waste any more time. On the main motion there were at least two express absentions – myself and Mr. McLendon, who was representing Louisiana in his capacity as Vice Chair since Mr. Lewis was not on the call.
The reason I voted to abstain rather than vote no was because I am brand new on the board and did not feel like it was really my place to go against the state chairs on this issue that a bunch of them were on the call specifically to address. Also, I think that their concern was valid, although IMO the solution was a huge over-reaction as well as not addressing several of the individuals most responsible for the flame wars on the list, especially Mr. Weinman who remains on the list in his capacity as LSLA secretary, and a few others including several actual state chairs.
I don’t remember for sure what the actual vote was but I think it may have been 9-0-2 with two express abstentions. Mr. Weinman did not note the abstentions in his minutes, however. I would prefer it if the impression was not left that I was in favor of this overkill change in policy, which I believe was unwise, fails to address the entire problem it was meant to address and cuts off an important avenue of feedback for HQ staff and LNC.
Only one person writes that report. I am in theory on the ballot access committee, but it is not doing anything that I have been made aware of (as a committee, not as individuals). I sent an email after the last LNC meeting welcoming the new member elected at that meeting (GJTX) and suggesting a new phone conference, asking about various things we are or should be doing as a committee etc., and got zero replies. We’ve had one phone conference that I know of, and very little in the way of email discussions, unless I was not copied. It may be challenging to have a committee do business when the committee chair is on the record that the committee should not exist.
I continue to remain amazed about all the different things that are not being pursued much, much, much more – for example, monthly donations and for another example, various different kinds of project fundraising. More than anything else I remain of the belief that the six goals chosen by the LNC should not have included things that they are not accountable for by the end of their current term and that it was a big mistake to not include membership prospecting, membership goals, financial goals and strategies for getting t them among the goals that were set.
LFA
It’s down to less than 3,500 to go at this point. See http://www.lp.org/okla and if you can please make a donation while you are there. Regardless of whether you are in a position to donate or deem this worthy or not you can use the page to track the progress on raising the last 10k of the 60k that has to be raised for Oklahoma.
At this time Raised: $6,509.52 Goal: $10,000.00
The page also explains:
Given that it has taken so much longer to send it than Redpath assumed when he wrote the following, and less than 15k remains to be raised, I don’t know if this letter will actually be mailed as planned – (I am guessing not?) but it’s a good letter, I think he does a great job of explaining it here… I will not cut and paste the text because as you can see above with my quotes from LFA, the spacing issues when cutting and pasting from a pdf, but I hope everyone reads this:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/2015-07-HO-Okla-letter-v1c.pdf
And then goes back to http://www.lp.org/okla and do whatever you can. If it helps anyone please consider it a personal favor to me, but even if you don’t like me or couldn’t care either way if I have a job or not there are many other reasons to do this and other petitioners who will be working there so you don’t have to consider it a personal favor to me if that’s a demotivator for you.
BTW sorry for all these typos. My keyboard sucks, and although I could go back and fix them, I just don’t have the patience.
Katz via LFA
There have been many different kinds of parties which have suceeded or not in a variety of ways, some of which did not involve becoming large (“major”) parties with thousands of people in office etc. It’s a mistake to assume that this is the only kind of success a political party can have. If the end goal is to change public policy by running for office, sometimes that is accomplished in a variety of ways even when we lose, as other parties have proven in the past.
To some extent true, but to some extent I don’t agree. In the short to medium term, our objective is to identify the libertarians who don’t yet know they are libertarians and get them actively involved in the party and excited to donate their time and money to the LP. There are lots of people who are libertarians and don’t know it. There are lots of liberatarians who are not LP members. There are lots of LP members who are not active, or not as active as they could be if we inspired them more. If we could simply inspire the people who are already LP members to be active and the libertarians who are not already LP members/donors/volunteers to become LP members/donors/volunteers we would be much bigger and stronger than we are now and much more effective in forcing the changes we want by challenging otherwise unchallenged incumbents, swinging more races, participating in more debates, being out there more and persuading more people, electing more people to more low level offices, being on the ballot in more races we don’t win so more people look us up and get involved in various ways, and so on.
If our outreach is not designed to reach and motivate libertarians, we are ignoring the most effective lever we have. Yes, we do have to reach the general public as well and we need to take that into account but it’s a mistake to think or say that the only audience we need to shoot for should be the general public or that our only yardsticks of success should be those applied to “major” parties.
If we fail to inspire libertarians they will pursue other startegies more, or be uninvolved more, and do LP activities less. And if we bend over to try to win non-libertarians over and get elected too much we will bring in too many people that are not libertarians and just want to get elected. To what end? They already have Democrats and Republicans for that. All of these things are incremental, but we need to balance them out, not pursue one end to the exclusion of the other.
Not sure if Mr. Katz identifies as a radical libertarian any longer – I know he did for years, but seems to have changed during the cours of his LNC term. I know he has said he is no longer an anarchist, although that is a separate question. I don’t know to what extent he reads IPR any more – I know he used to be a reglar in the comments here, although not lately. He also used to participate in LPRads discussions quite a bit, but again, not lately.
Sadly, he seems to have been won over by the arguments frequently made by Scott Lieberman on a lot of things lately.
That is a valid point. I don’t know enough about accounting to fully explain this, but consider this set of assumptions.
Suppose that Nielson deems that his time is worth 300 an hour, his emplyees time is worth 30 an hour (oversimplification but bear with me). He calculates that they are owed say 3 million dllars based on these assumption. In reality Nielson spends more money out of his own pocket than he takes in with campaign contributions and actually pays his employees 10 dollars per hour out of the 30 they are theoretically owed (note that I am using these numbers as an example, not claiming they were the actual numbers). He also spends money on candidate and staff travel, HQ rent, equipment, allegedly radio ads, ballot access payments, outreach materials, shipping, and so on. As far as the theory goes he is owed money for all this, plus late fees which continue to compound (explaining why the debt continued to grow long after the campaign ended). He banks on the FEC making up the difference, but it does not happen. At this point the assumptions are built in, so as far as the followup reports go, he continues to list the amounts he would like to have received – that is, the rates he charges other clients – as debt, plus interest rates. In theory, if he ever actually does get the money, he will pay his employees the rest of what they are owed off their work on the 2012 campaign, but in reality the money will not materalize as a practical matter.
Is reporting it that way dishonest? Illegal? I don’t know. He says it is not. I lack the expertise to evaluate those claims.
Is this what happened? I don’t know. But I do know that I have multiple sources on what people actually got paid, and it was peanuts. I do know that I saw and personally observed a lot of the different kinds of spending that Phillies says never took place. These things I can confirm independently, and I do. I know that some of my sources on what people really got paid have had a falling out with Nielson since then, yet still say that people were paid low salaries. I don’t have independent confirmation of radio ads. Nielson admits there was not much in the way of TV ads, he says because he found that radio was much more cost effective, but the fundraising kept saying get Johnson on TV. He does say there was some minimal T advertising. Again, he is my only source on those aspects…but I have plenty of other sources as well as my own observations about other spending and actual salaries.
Is this a good way to operate? I would say no. I’ve told Ron several times that I am for transparency, as well as for him to go on the record and explain this all himself. He disagrees with me about transparency, but said he would go on the record, and then doesn’t do it. I’ve openly admitted I am not happy about that.
Am I explaining this all correctly? As far as I know, I am explaining it as accurately as I understand it, and am honestly trying to convey the correct information. However, I admit to not being able to evaluate all the claims, I admit that I only have one source regarding some of the information (advertising money, other than in-person outreach materials and yard signs, shich I did witness first hand). I admit it is possible that I did not understand some of what he told me, and may be explaining it incorrectly if I made such a misunderstanding. I don’t know if I did or did not, but if I did I apologize, it is unintentional. These are among the reasons I wish Ron would go on the record and answer questions himself instead of second hand through me, given that I don’t have all the facts and may or may not be misinterpreting some things he told me.
In any case, if I did understand him correctly, a lot of the money that was spent on various things other than salaries is listed under Political Advisors, and the reason why is because he would like to recover that money some day since in reality he subsidized what the campaign raised and de facto paid for these things out of hisown pocket, and among other thins if he was to officially write the debt off he will have made an illegally large contribution to the campaign …. so it has to remain as debt on the reports and in theory he is continuing to pursue this money, albeit not very actively.
Is that a rational reason why those spending amounts are not on the reports, but are instead reported as salaries and debt? YMMV. It is an explanation. I have conveyed it several times, so it’s not true that there has not been an explanation. I think it’s rational, albeit I would have certainly tried to do things differently, and I can’t tell you whether all this (if I understood it corectly, and if this is in fact what happened) is legal or not. I know Phillies has seen me convey this information several times so he must think it’s not a rational explanation, based on the above quote Readers here can make up their own minds, although readers of LFA who are not readers of these comments are not getting that option.
LFA on Johnson finances
Key words being based on these reports. I have addressed that at length in past threads.
As I said in prior threads:
1. So Nielson can keep charging other clients more, and not make it look like he lowered his rates.
2. For reasons unknown to me, he doesn’t like financial transparency and does not want anyone to actually know how the campaign spent money. Again, I don’t know why, but he seems to everything he can to make it as opaque as possible, including putting a lot of different things down under Political Advisers and leaving the assumption to be made that it was for salaries, or just for his own profit, whereas he says this was not the case.
3. Conceivably, to create a way for Nielson to de facto contribute more to Johnson than he legally could, and then either recover the money from FEC matching funds (which fell through) or claim it as debt, yet not actually ever do anything to actively try to collect the debt, since he knows the chances of recovering it are negligible, while continuing to work with the same client Nielson says all this is legal, too.
4. Initially, to try to get a larger matching money amount from the FEC. This has since fallen through and been added to the debt column. He is not officially writing off the debt, but is not actively pursuig it, because he does not think there is a decent chance of getting the money. However, it keeps going on the reports as debt, and continues to be theoretically owed.
Whether this is rational or not is up to you, but you have heard this explanation now more than once.
LFA on Nevada finances: very interesting.
A very different picture from what Brett Pojunis was telling me on the phone yesterday about all the LP activity in Nevada, which made it sound like a very successful affiliate that is on the verge of much greater success. How can this be if they have less than a thousand dollars in the bank? And how do they manage to have such a nice office (I have seen it) and all that equipment and allegedly several full time employees, including the State Chair himself? Where is the money coming from and how is it being accounted for? All very mysterious.
Yes, but we all know he won’t recuse, as a practical matter. Who else should recuse and why?
More importantly, when they rule as expected, who can this be appealed to and how? My guess is the real world courts, with the LNC among the defendants? Keep in mind here that Wagner et al have acctually spent several times more money on the Oregon lawsuits than Aaron Starr has — something like 300k and counting as of the last I heard. Given the financial state of the LNC this coud be a very big problem.
I don’t see much concern from LNC members or hardly anyone expressed about it, though.
.
Looking at the JC roster, who can disagree and why/how/on what basis?
That’s quite an understatement.
Unless I missed something, the video I saw shows Dave Terry, by no means a friend of Wagner, resort to violence. He claims he was verbally provoked, which is questionable, but I don’t see how he could credibly claim to be acting in self-defense or in any fear that he would be physically attacked. Verbal provocation alone is not generally considered by libertarians to be an initiation of force that justifies a physically violent response. How does your side responding to words with violence constitute the other side starting a violent scuffle? The attempt to eject opponents from the meeting, as I understand it, was based on the contention that they were not in fact current and legitimately elected or appointed members of the state exec comm which was then meeting at that time. Some were past members who had resigned and some were allegedly county representatives with no kind of evidence that they had been appointed or elected to represent those counties. I don’t know the truth of those claims but that puts what Carling says there into some perspective.
I have no idea who can appeal that, or how or to whom, although I think he has a majority anyway.
Meanwhile, on the topic of the nut factory, we have a truly delightful quote from Bradford Delong:
“Just Think: Every Republican Candidate Thinks Donald Trump Is Qualified to Be President, and Has Pledged to Support Him If He Wins the Republican Nomination…”
http://www.bradford-delong.com/2015/08/just-think-every-republican-candidate-thinks-donald-trump-is-qualified-to-be-president-and-has-pledged-to-support-him-if-he.html
“Why do you hate women?” is not a legitimate question at a Presidential debate. It’s about as appropriate as a priest officiating your wedding asking you if you promise to never rape a kitten.
A proper question at a Presidential debate is “What do you want to do with immigration, and why are these other guys wrong?”
If you thought that Alinskyite bullshit was a legitimate question, you have no business calling yourself a serious person.
William, I’m not deleting your pingbacks, either. In fact, I use them to check out the site.
Thanks for backing me, Paulie. You’d think I’d know better, but I’ve been truly shocked at the many people who think Trump’s behavior was acceptable. The country is in worse shape than I thought and, for the first time ever, I’m wondering if there really is a “war on women”.
@ 8/9 4:10 PM That’s why I said “at first”. At one point there was debate in favor of a one day meeting with almost nothing to discuss. Something was eventually added to the agenda on the topic.
Trump’s ex-wife denies that he raped her. She has endorsed him for president.
From what I saw, I formed the opinion (and this opinion is shared by many others) that that debate was meant to discredit Trump as a woman-hater, fake Republican, or just another politician. They failed. Polls shows that Trump won the debate and yet the Frank Luntz focus group said the exact opposite.
LFA
I did not know this. Is it actually true that the LNC is on the hook to pay the bill for it? I assumed that the Judicial Committee members who want to meet in person would pay to do so. Why do they need to meet in person, exactly? As far as I know the JC has always done its business, to the extent it has had any, by mail, other than at national convention sites. What is it about this particular meeting that requites it to be in person and why is the LNC tasked to pay for it? Does the LNC pay for platform, bylaws, etc committee meetings when they meet in person? As far as I know no (please correct if I am wrong). If I am right, why would this be different? Given that the LNC has not allocated any money for this, who gets to decide how much money the LNC has to spend on it and is there a cap? It just sounds wrong in a whole bunch of ways to me. Anyone to shed light on this?
LFA
Thank you for doing that.
The notifications I received from many FB groups did not have the full link to the IPR story, just to IPR, unlike the version in the LFA newsletter. I hope you went back and added the full link on the various FB groups, or will.
LFA
I’ll reiterate here what I said in the original thread about this that this is a big mistake on the part of the LNC in my view. I understand why some people don’t want to tangle with Randalbots but I believe they are miscalculating the situation, and laid out why I think so in some detail in the original thread.
The major difference between Trump and the other Republicans is dealing with women is that Trump attacks point targets in the open, while the other Republicans attack every woman in America by stealth, stabbing them in the back via abortion bans and attacks on Gardisil vaccine.
LFA
Sorry for the spacing issues, I don’t feel like fixing them.
As to the point: there was a pretty heated discussion about them on Sunday. I thin our notes about it and possibly the video (I haven’t checked) are stil laailable. Official minutes have also been circulated. I don’t remember at the moment if they are final or draft at this time and how comprehensive or not the were about that part of the discussion.
It’s also possible that it was discussed even more honestly in executive session and various other ways that were not on the public record.
Trump missed his good line: Yes, I used the laws to maximum advantage of me and my employees, against people who knew the rules. Make me President, and Ill do the same for everyone in America. Think back 30 years. Who was the American people’s #1 choice for trade negotiator…J R Ewing. He doesn’t exist, but I do.
Thanks as always!
Addressing a few points below…
I thought that would be up your alley. In fact I thought of you as soon as I saw the comment 🙂
As far as I know it doesn’t, and didn’t, engage in day to day governance.
If the debate sponsors were planning to wrecking the Trump campaign, they apparently did not do too well. Polling of Republican primary voters, which for once is what matters, indicates that he won the debate. Rubio and Carson were second and third, with about half of Trump’s support. Way at the bottom were Christie, Paul, and Walker.
Name some and how exactly sniping, shitty or BS, or anything other than completely legitimate and pertinent questions.
And Megyn Kelly isn’t the only woman he attacks. The whole point of the question is how he has a long pattern of very extreme attacks on many different women. The initial response was to throw out cheap applause line horseshit about Rosie O’Donnell, and when Megyn correctly pointed out that it was not only O’Donnell by a long shot, the next resort was griping about PC (a catch-all excuse meant to justify any and every kind of bad behavior and egregious prejudice), veering off into irrelevancies, and then coming back with threats (I could be not so nice to you) … followed by a bunch of vindictive attacks the next day.
In other words par for the course for Trump and yet another illustration of exactly what she was asking him about, among many others.
That’s barely scratching the surface though…scroll way up for the video about the time he raped his ex-wife. I wonder how many other rapes he has committed which were never reported?
Right, so if any woman questions the Donald she will be attacked mercilessly, and all the more so if she points out his long history of doing this. And if she doesn’t like it she has to shut up and stop voting or speaking in public.
How about… no.
Right, because he has never attacked anyone unprovoked in his whole life?
Her questions were legitimate. His counterattacks were childish, dumb, and psychotic. Calling her a bimbo and a lot of the rest was merely juvenile meanness, but the odd rambling about bleeding from her eyes or “somewhere” was truly twisted and a glimpse into a very dangerous sociopathic mind. What was he suggesting, that she had to be on the rag because she did not genuflect to him? And bleeding from her eyes….WTF? Was he trying to invoke that she has ebola or is possessed by demons or something? The man is insane and most definitely does not belong anywhere near the nuclear button.
If he gets elected and feels somehow dissed or disrespected or even imagines it that could be the end of all life on this planet.
Assumes facts not in evidence. For example, the question about his many attacks on women was completely correct and on the money, and if anything too softball.
Trump interprets any criticism or questioning as an attack and then counterattacks viciously and disproportionately. He is a grudge driven vindictive narcicistic megalomaniac, full of himself and even more full of loathing for anyone who dares to question him or his supposed greatness.
Exactly! Correct on all points. Well said.
Maybe. You think she is not capable of coming up with them herself? Or that they somehow weren’t valid questions? If so, I disagree, on both counts.
Yes, and he was also born of a virgin and ascended to the heavens.
Maybe, maybe not. Got proof?
I sill don’t know who is doing that or why. I never saw the pingbacks to begin with either. Anyone know?
To whoever keeps deleting the pings to http://amthirdpartyreport.com/2015/08/09/lnc-chair-sarwark-praises-hillary-clinton-in-letter-to-editor/, I ask that you please stop. I am adding the ping deliberately to direct people to the article on our site American Third Party Report.
Megyn Kelly was asking the questions that Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes gave her to ask. Those two are afraid of Trump because he is not someone they can manipulate with their money. The questions, the panel, and the focus group were all set up to discredit Trump.
I watched the debates, every second of them, trying again. I do NOT think Meghan attacked Trump at all. That’s because I believe they were valid questions, and Trump should have answered without whining like a baby. Clearly, your mileage varies but I still think decency for all genders has value.
If the “highest standard” for leaders is that they don’t fight back against lies and Communist-style bullshit attacks spread by the establishment, those “leaders” will immediately be crushed and won’t be “leading” anything.
Well Jill, Trump was counterattacking, not attacking per se.
“Men attacking women” should not be the new normal.
The norm for 100 years in this country has been that women vote and participate in politics.
If you participate and attack people like the RNC/Bush tool Megyn Kelly has done, you might get counterattacked. You don’t get to hide behind your petticoat after making sniping little shitty BS attacks. You don’t get a double standard. You can either enter the arena and fight, or you can just STFU. It’s called equality. If this is all too much for you, I suggest you get to work on repealing the 19th Amendment.
Green w/o adjectives writes (August 9, 2015 at 11:08 am), “100 years later, political parties still have “executive committees” making decisions for us when, in fact, we possess the tech for liquid democracy and direct democracy. It’s startling to ponder that 1890-1917 may have been the high-water mark for democratic deliberation and decision-making in the West and our forms of government and organization have in fact become more oligarchical and bureaucratic since then.”
I share your dismay at the condition of governance even in alternative parties that should know better. How is day-to-day governance of the Green Party going these days? There’s a committee of 300 or something, isn’t there? I haven’t checked recently.
Liberty for America for August is out
http://libertyforamerica.com/liberty-for-america-magazine/
The August 2015 issue
Rand Paul Tries to Raid Our Donors
Oregon Again to the Judicial Committee
Nevada Finances
John$on Finances
LNC Finances are Challenging
Free Range Kids
State Fundraising
LSLA EMail List Participation
More on the LNC: Libertarian Renaissance
Wesley Clark
I wrote the last issue “Your Editor expects that issues will in the future be less frequent.”
It seems that I didn’t quite get that one right. There has been much interesting news in the last month. Perhaps I should start predicting “the stock market did not rise 50% this month”.
So, men attacking women must be the new normal? Okay, I’ll remember that.
Our country and its leaders whould be held to the highest standard possible, although that tradition seems quite forgotten. That doesn’t mean citizens shouldn’t keep striving for it.
Yes, I find O’Donnell obnoxious, but personal attacks from someone who wants to be a leader is not appropriate. Duh.
Yes, for some reason, the spam filter holds up any comment that includes multiple links — even if they are links to other IPR threads!
I’ve complained about it many times, but to no avail — apparently, only Warren has the power to change it, and he seems unwilling to do so.
Anyway, the only solution appears to be limiting it to a single link per comment.
Kidding aside, I guess it was the links that trigger that.
“My comment is awaiting moderation”
Good idea. Better make sure I don’t say anything subversive.
Peter Orvetti writes
“I’ve been reading Jack Ross’s new book “The Socialist Party of America: A Complete History”. It’s good, but long — I’m nearly 200 pages in, and Gene Debs isn’t even in jail yet.”
Wouldn’t mind having a look at that. I recently read 2 books online on the subject, both of which I would highly recommend
Ira Kipnis
https://books.google.com/books?id=ili0huEKAk0C
Morris Hillquit
https://books.google.com/books/about/Socialism.html?id=8z4OAAAAYAAJ
One of the many things that jump out at me reading these books is how little party organization has evolved (or frankly devolved) since that time, even in the Green Party (with the exception, perhaps, of the development of some consensus-based decision-making methods). For example, the SPA deployed membership referendum on many occasions…when was the last time there was a referendum decision via the membership of an American political party?
100 years later, political parties still have “executive committees” making decisions for us when, in fact, we possess the tech for liquid democracy and direct democracy. It’s startling to ponder that 1890-1917 may have been the high-water mark for democratic deliberation and decision-making in the West and our forms of government and organization have in fact become more oligarchical and bureaucratic since then.
Jill, Rosie o’donnell attacked trump and mocked him and his family on national broadcast television. Trump’s a guy who fights back. Do you also find Rosie O’Donnell to be equally classless, or are you just a yammering hypocrite?
Green Party Green TV Richard Winger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4a1nIpxvEks
Yet another Andy J comment moved from the Rand Paul thread
I already replied to that point earlier in the Rand Paul thread:
Moving another comment by Andy J from the Rand Paul thread:
Republican debate:
Comment by Andy J. moved here from Rand Paul thread:
Please move the petitioning tangent from the Rand Paul thread here.
http://knappster.blogspot.com/2015/08/how-about-some-liveblog-really-big-shew.html
I’m live-blogging the debate on FB under Jill Catherine, if anyone’s ionterested.
I really, really don’t like Trump. His joke about Rosie O’Donnell shows what an utterly classless man he is.
http://knappster.blogspot.com/2015/08/how-about-some-liveblog-kids-table.html
If anyone hadn’t learned that yet, they should now, but then again if they haven’t learned it yet…
Clearly there is a lesson to take from Rand Paul: You can try to be more like the bullies, but they’re not going to change.
https://www.facebook.com/LibertariansAgainstRandPaul/photos/a.1578099305795410.1073741828.1578094652462542/1622280461377294
Thank you Peter Orvetti for the link to the Everson story. It inspired me to write a Wikinews article on the subject https://en.wikinews.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_candidate_Mark_Everson_challenges_debate_exclusion
We need to keep jobs in America and make America great again. Let the Germans keep their rusty old ovens, we need American ovens built by American workers!
I’m glad to see Sawant continues to do well.
M. Ian Uranus
“Trump said that the Mexican leaders are sending their rapists here because it is true. Only Trump knows how to put a stop to it, send all the Mexicans back to Mexico and make the Mexicans pay to put up a wall that no Mexican will ever cross ever again.”
Sieg heil mein fuhrer,
Sieg heil Herr Trump!!!!
I think the Germans may have some used ovens that they might let us buy to solve your problem!
Actually, I’m convinced that 1 clip of 9mm’s would solve “our” problem!! Heir Uranus
Trump said that the Mexican leaders are sending their rapists here because it is true. Only Trump knows how to put a stop to it, send all the Mexicans back to Mexico and make the Mexicans pay to put up a wall that no Mexican will ever cross ever again.
You can follow the re-election of Kshama Sawant here.
https://electionsdata.kingcounty.gov/2015/election-results-august/three/City/Seattle/City%20of%20Seattle%20Council%20District%20No.%203
Seattle/WA State votes by mail, so the initial returns are from ballots that arrived by last Friday. The returns will be updated everyday at 430pm Pacific time. Seattle City Council is all non-partisan, but Kshama Sawant is an open member of the Socialist Alternative group.
It’s almost incredible that Mexican leaders sending us their rapists is a theory that actually gets traction. Trump expressed it a second time in this interview, around 3:20, so having said it before was not just mindless blather for him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZtdSReCs1Y
EARTH TO URANUS…………
EARTH TO URANUS, COME IN!!!………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………..
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,OH NEVERMIND
They are outsmarting the other American leaders but they will fold like a cheap hooker’s corn taco when faced with the awesome negotiating power of Donald Trump. Trump is a true American hero, a Champion among Champions.
Well be careful, he did say that the Mexican leaders are smarter than AMERICAN leaders.
(I wonder, is Trump not patriotic!)
He will be the nominee. He will be the President. He will beat the Chinese, the Mexicans, the Iranians, and ISIS. America will be made great once again!
Yes he’ll still be rich and free of all emotional difficulties like jealousy and empathy.
Trump will emerge victorious!
Yeah losing LP nomination would be bad marketing. If he runs as an independent after, people will say “he couldn’t even get the libertarians to support him!” Actually, I hope that happens (if his run is inevitable).
He won’t waste his time with the LP. His approval rating in LP circles is way lower than in the Democratic Party.
American Party or The Trump Party (More Donald All The Time!) is far more likely.
He’ll then probably get the American Party nomination or run as an independent. Possibly he’ll try for and lose the Libertarian nomination.
How Trump will lose. If not now then it will probably get a lot of attention close to the Iowa caucus, and then you’ll see Walker/Bush winning “all of a sudden”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Mm3TAS-msY
Dave, it will be disappointing if M Carling doesn’t recuse himself, as he would be exposing himself as being unethical. Please tell him I said so.
GP> “Readers might want to count how many members of that committee should have recused themselves on the basis of prior or current involvement in the Oregon matter. Perhaps I will by and by do this.”
Soooooooooooo, why don’t you? Are you waiting for an embossed invitation?
IF, it is the “right” thing to do, why are you standing at the fork in the road? If you wish to be a leader, you must step up in order to step out! OR did you miss that class at leadership school?
I ‘d suggest Reno/Lake Tahoe!
SOMEBODY should have a good time!
Judicial Committee
M Carling
Rob Latham
Steve Linnabary
Rob Power
Rebecca Sink-Burris
Dianna Visek
Andy Wolf
Yes, why not in Oregon?
Who’s on the committee? I know I can look it up, but I’m busy at work (and shouldn’t be checking IPR at all).
If they are going to meet face-to-face, why not in Oregon?
be in the form
I am amused to report that the Judicial Committee hearing on the Oregon appeal will by in the form of a face-to-face meeting, likely in the Midwest. Readers might want to count how many members of that committee should have recused themselves on the basis of prior or current involvement in the Oregon matter. Perhaps I will by and by do this.
Does anyone know what network John
Stossel is on,now?
Methinks the laddie doth protest too much!
‘Uranus will soon be attacked again with great force.”
Is this wishful thinking, on your part??
MY anus is off limits!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7m1gCdHi0s
Uranus withstood attack, but don’t get too relaxed just yet. Uranus will soon be attacked again with great force.
Saturn was gone?
No. Pluto was gone. But thanks to NASA, it’s back!
……and SOME people believed that only God could
make a “planet” disappear and then reappear!
BTW…anyone watch the new Rap News in the post above?
I stayed offline completely for I think maybe about 3 months in 2013. Surprisingly I was having relatively few withdrawal symptoms, given how much I am on it most of the time.
William–I try to stay away from the computer every once in a while in an attempt to get other things done, but I always go back sooner than I plan to. Not that I’m saying this is what happened to you, though!
I hope your hiatus was worthwhile.
From what I can tell about the same amount as they usually get in an equivalent period of time.
His own blogs received very few updates.
Despite the announcement of hiatus, which I did see, I noticed to change in frequency of posting by him during the self-proclaimed hiatus.
My hiatus is also over. Check out the first video above at 3:20 thru 3:50. Everyone needs to heed this message before it’s too late and elect Mr. Bob Whitaker for President or Mr. Donald Trump!
Saturn was gone?
Welcome back!
My hiatus is over.