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. This month, we’re going bilingual on you. As my fellow Soviet emigre put it,
“My dear fellow, who will let you?” “That’s not the point. The point is, who will stop me?”
First up representing the USA is Scuzz Twittly, explaining the limits of his tolerance:
And in the other corner we have Rabfak from Russia rocking the boat:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESEQ2I6BDqc
Let the battle royale begin…in the comments….
John Stossel: What’s Happening to Free Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmPGgBtCJJM
🙂
Yeah, just like that one.
You mean an article like this one that Andy Craig posted yeterday? https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/03/robert-sarvis-op-ed-on-the-importance-of-third-parties-and-virginias-ballot-access-barriers/
Probably worth of an article – part one of 4 – http://www.collegiatetimes.com/opinion/article_966443d4-d405-11e4-80d1-f3bd890d1ebd.html
Its a Sarvis piece that, through the two parts I’ve read so far, seems pretty damn good.
Not my ultimate goal, but it would be a big step in that direction…
Military Takeover Plan Revealed: Is Your State Next?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzodkFAcLKI
According to his self proclaimed deadline he is supposed to shit or get off the pot by Tuesday.
Socialist Alternative on Bernie Sanders in 2016.
http://www.socialistalternative.org/2015/03/04/bernie-sanders-edges-closer-running-democrat/
His anti-migrant and pro-warmongering BS are two of the things that come to mind. He is also a supporter of the racist “war on drugs” and “war on terror.” Those are a few things off the top right there.
What has Cruz done that is “white supremacist”?
Entire Federal Martial Law Plan Exposed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U-PNPOiLjo
Paulie, I second Last Week Tonight: Municipal Violations. Usually my tolerance of epithets is pretty low but Oliver makes it seem like no other words could be used.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kMc6ELFM1U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UjpmT5noto
COINTELPRO 101 – The Manipulation of Your Country and Your Mind
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55XvabwpEYQ
Wow, Jed! That would be great. I would be very interested in what a 2015 gathering of Drys looks like. Please see what you can do.
Apparently the Prohibition Party of PA will be holding a state committee meeting not far from me some time this spring. I’m going to try to get the info from Jim Hedges & see if I can attend. If I do I’ll take notes & write up a report.
A lot of voters don’t really understand or take into account state by state electoral college dynamics.
If the election nationwide is close, they are afraid their vote will be “wasted” or “spoiled” even if their particular state is a blowout.
I didn’t say Castle would be their Presidential candidate :P. I don’t think he will be. Someone will be lured to run who has a bigger name. I’m not even sure Castle will make the ticket.
“Front-runners in this crowd are undoubtedly Castle, Lynch, and Shuler.” – Trent Hill
If the LP Nominates another Republican and the CP makes the ballot in PA (which is extremely dubious) I could vote for Castle.
At the moment, it appears that 2016 will be a Democratic blow-out, smiting the Republican, in which case there will be a relatively large pool of voters accessible to third parties.
However, if that argument worked well, then Libertarian Presidential candidates would do really well in Massachusetts, which is not the case.
“He said he was a Republican last time too.”
He did both last time, first the maybe-I’ll-run-as-a-Republican song and dance, and then later during the general election he publicly changed his voter registration to independent, so he could milk another round of speculation that he’d run that way. He’s since switched back to Republican.
Congrats Jed!
Coincidentally, I’ll be on the road towards a new job in Arkansas tomorrow.
See http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/attachments/20150309/204cb6bc/attachment-0001.pdf for details.
Excellent, Jed!
I’ll try to help a little more around here. Don’t worry about us!
Good news: I have a new job! It’s not great, but it’s cash flow & work, so that’s what’s important. I may not have *quite* as much free time now, and tomorrow I probably won’t be able to post any articles as I’ll be busy all day, so I’m counting on my fellow writers to keep IPR running smoothly.
Vaccines are dangerous and should be resisted with armed force.
I honestly don’t have the time. Not all of those guys are announced yet anyway. But, it’d be an interesting read. I hope someone does it.
Would you be up for inviting them to do a debate/discussion with each other and IPR readers (like what we did with the LP candidates)? https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/01/debatediscussion-thread-with-declared-candidates-for-the-2016-libertarian-presidential-nomination/
The CP is attracting more candidates than normal, despite having weaker ballot position. How very strange. So far, I know of these:
Chad Koppie–former candidate for Senate in Illinois.
Scott Copeland–Reverend from Texas.
Darrell Castle–Attorney from Tennessee and former VP candidate for the CP. Has donated over 20k to the CP NatCom since 2000.
Owen Shuler–Entrepreneur and financial businessman, donated $6000 in 2014 to the CP Natcomm.
Dennis Michael Lynch–Documentarian/film-maker and conservative commentator on television. Has an expansive Facebook following. http://www.dml2016.com/
Front-runners in this crowd are undoubtedly Castle, Lynch, and Shuler. They have money and are making the rounds with the right people. Koppie and Copeland are essentially wasting their time. Of course, we’ll see a few more entrants yet.
He said he was a Republican last time too.
I see where Trump has done his quadrennial BS of posturing that he will run for president. He is like Ventura except that this time he is apparently saying he is a Republican. What an ego!
JP> “If that really is who we end up with in debates, maybe it will be time to start looking for a new country to move to.”
If you can come up with a “new country to move to” where our objectives have a better chance than here, I pay for your ticket! (right after I pay for mine!)
“So instead of Hillary and Jeb we can have Hillary, Jeb and, say, Bloomberg.”
If that really is who we end up with in debates, maybe it will be time to start looking for a new country to move to.
Yep.
So instead of Hillary and Jeb we can have Hillary, Jeb and, say, Bloomberg.
Yeah, that’ll be great.
And back on a more serious note
Unity08/Americans Elect/Change The Rule is such a stupid idea: “We want to open up the debates/elections to a third candidate, but only if that candidate is exactly like the other two. Our goal is to stop big money from centrally controlling elections by putting big money into centrally controlling elections.”
I guess “stupid” is the wrong word. Obviously the whole point is to suck the air out of real alternatives by heavily promoting fake ones.
In less depressing news
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1XyDXKyFAY
Probably a lot more than ten fold. I really need to get to work on that article I have been putting off about him hiring the campaign manager behind the dirty tricks the Rauner campaign played to keep the LP off the ballot in Illinois last year, plus all the other revelations about his work to suppress LP and alt party candidates that Opposition News already published.
And in other news, Americans Elect is back, as Change the Rule (see http://mobile.thehill.com/homenews/campaign/236046-adding-independent-voices-to-the-debate)
They have a proposal similar to what we are working on with the OAI lawsuit, but with one difference: if more than one candidate qualifies for 270+ Electoral Votes besides the established two they will hold a signature contest to see which one of them will get to be in the debates.
From my email to OAI leadership this morning:
In news that isn’t strictly alt-party but might be of interest to IPR readers, Rand Paul has set the date for formally announcing his campaign: April 7. Meaning we have that a ten-fold increase in Rand-ite attacks on the LP to look forward to.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/17/rand-paul-presidential-bid-announcement-expected-april-7/
Hi Dave –
The headline and the description in Sen. Kruse’s release says that SB442 requires immunizations. What you (accurately) quoted says that SB442 is about the documentation by school systems of how parents can decline immunizations. I realize this is just a summary we’re looking at and not the bill itself, but am I missing something? Does the bill say something that the summary does not?
Thanks!
Meanwhile the LNC Auditr Committee has requested time at the next LNC meeting for a report. The request includes a request for executive session time.
But NOT ANYTHING CLOSE to Bank’s “new idea” of using a fork to wipe his ass, etc., etc., etc.
“Is this a new idea for you?”
Most likely…much like wiping his ass, using a fork, etc., etc.
wolfefan
SB 442 does not appear to match the desciption offered by Dave Terry above. Here’s a link: http://gov.oregonlive.com/bill/2015/SB442/
SB 442;
“Directs Oregon Health Authority to adopt by rule schedule requiring submission of document to school administrator for purposes of declining immunization if document on record does not include signature of health care practitioner verifying that parent has reviewed risks and benefits of immunization or certificate verifying that parent has completed vaccine educational module”.
It says exactly what Senator Kruse SAID it did!
Good suggestion for the LP booth at next year’s CPAC:
http://www.targetliberty.com/2015/03/blowback-muddying-of-libertarian.html
”
Jill Pyeatt
March 14, 2015 at 11:44 pm
Dave Terry, I don?t think we need cops at all. Is this a new idea for you? Go to a couple sites like ‘Copblock’, read some of the horror stories, and you just might think so, too.”
Also check out my concept of a Libertarian Zone.
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/07/andy-jacobs-the-libertarian-zone/
Dave Terry, I don’t think we need cops at all. Is this a new idea for you? Go to a couple sites like “Copblock”, read some of the horror stories, and you just might think so, too.
another cop that we should respect, admire, and thank.
>Rob Banks
We don’t need them. At all.
And Mr. Banks opens his vault and spews more nonsense!
You could look that up as easily as anyone else.
The thing with Hillary’s email is that she set up so it was simple to easily erase and delete evidence of the bombings, drones, wars of agression and other killer policies — and why they came about, who advocated for them, and who put money in the Clinton slushfund to ensure that they happened. Maybe someone could tell Bruce Fenton that. Is Mr. Fenton running for office as LP or something?
We don’t need them. At all.
Just another cop that we should respect, admire, and thank.
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/video-shows-school-resource-officer-choking-child-limp/
Video Shows Cop Choking Out Child Until He Goes Limp, Child Left with Brain Injury
He/she is a Democrat, but independent of the two major genders —
NH’s first transgender lawmaker arrested for hospital bomb threat –
http://www.unionleader.com/article/20150312/NEWS03/150319651
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/man-jailed-rapping-lyrics-famous-eminem/
Man Jailed for Rapping Lyrics Made Famous by Eminem
Postal Service Caught Deploying Face-Scanning Cameras
http://www.infowars.com/postal-service-caught-deploying-face-scanning-cameras/
http://theantimedia.org/scotland-yard-chief-wants-cctv/
Scotland Yard Chief Wants CCTV Cameras in EVERY Home
Apparently thinks 1984 was an instruction manual.
A few years ago, I designated Pat Robertson as our National Idiot (sort of the opposite of National Treasure). He has competition once in a while, like from Michelle Bachmann or someone like that, but I can’t think of anyone in the public eye who says such consistently ridiculous things. I can’t imagine that anyone takes him seriously.
You took something Dave Terry said seriously? LOL.
SB 442 does not appear to match the desciption offered by Dave Terry above. Here’s a link: http://gov.oregonlive.com/bill/2015/SB442/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZHIg9TETAU
Hi Darryl – Just wondering about the minutes of the LP-NH convention. If the convention was not properly noticed per the Judicial Committee, why did it proceed? I don’t see anything in the minutes about overruling the JC – does this affect the legitimacy of any actions taken?
http://www.lp.org/blogs/staff/libertarians-working-for-you-show-with-matthew-schutter-and-clayton-sanford
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2bGR0Jlo3Po
The Truth About “Police Oversight Boards”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfYpXYNshKQ
2015 NH Liberty Party Annual Convention recap
March 6, 2015 – The NH Liberty Party, formed in September 2012, held its third annual convention during the New Hampshire Liberty Forum in Manchester, NH. The 2015 Annual Convention was well attended, with a total of 15 attendees, 8 of whom were party members.
Party members voted to officially make a single change to the party bylaws, which allows the co-chairs of the party to make grammatical changes to the bylaws without need for adoption of amendment. The intent of the bylaw modification was to correct a single spelling error within the bylaws. The bylaws change was adopted unanimously.
Party members also elected a new State Committee. Four candidates were nominated for the three co-chair seats. Co-founders Ian Freeman and Darryl W. Perry were re-elected with 8 votes, Conan Salada was elected to a seat he once held with 7 votes, and Howard Wilson received 2 votes. The new State Committee would like to thank Jason Denonville for his year of service on the State Committee.
minutes of 2015 Libertarian Party of NH convention:
3p Secretary, 2 members of the Judicial Committee and 1 other LPNH member arrived at meeting location.
305p Secretary asked judicial committee if proper notice was given for the convention – the date had been set with 30 days notice; however the time and location had not been announced until 3 hours before convention. Judicial Committee stated that proper notice was not given.
310p Chair arrived, stated convention would proceed
A few other members arrived, and the location was changed within the hotel. A total of 9 LPNH members attended the convention.
315p Convention began with statement by the chair.
John Babiarz asked Rich Tomasso about the lawsuit
Rich Kahn mentioned that he would be willing to work with the new Exec to get things brought to speed
Darryl motioned to amend the bylaws to allow for resignations by officers, Brian Chabot seconded
passed without objection
Darryl motioned amend constitution to specify that the party must have a convention annually, Tom Kershaw second
passed without objection – to be ratified next convention
amendments from previous convention (wording about domicile & residency) adopted without objection
Darryl proposed a state party platform
platform proposal tabled
officer nominations:
Darryl – Chair
Rich T. – Chair
Brian Chabot – Vice Chair
Tom Kershaw – Treasurer
John Babiarz – Judicial committee
Rosalie – Judicial committee
Motion was to have Rich T. remain chair of the party until the lawsuit, Darryl to seek the Vice-Chair seat until the next convention. Brian Chabot then withdrew from the Vice Chair seat to run for Membership Committee Chair; Darryl withdrew from Chair race to run for Vice Chair.
slate elected:
Rich T. – Chair
Darryl – Vice-chair
Brian Chabot – Membership Committee Chair
Tom Kershaw – Treasurer
John Babiarz – Judicial committee
Rosalie – Judicial committee
new officers elected by acclamation
Rich T. says we should again bring back quarterly meetings of the Executive Committee
Darryl to chair Platform Committee – to seek members for committee
Brian Chabot volunteered to be on committee
Judicial to find a third member
need members in Membership Committee
motion to adjorn at 424p
OREGON STATE SENATOR TAKES ON COMPULSORY IMMUNIZATION
Senator Jeff Kruse R-Roseburg, District 1
Phone: 503-986-1701 900 Court St. NE, S-315 Salem Oregon 97301
Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.oregonlegislature.gov/kruse
MARCH 6, 2015
A CHANGE OF PACE
I intended on writing about the issues that were taken up on the floors of the House and Senate this week, but events happened which I think need to be communicated now. Yesterday Robert Kennedy Jr. was in Salem for a screening of a new movie he helped create called “Trace Amounts.” We also had the opportunity to spend a couple of hours with him before the screening to have a very in depth discussion on the subject of the movie which is vaccinations. I want to say for the record I am not opposed to vaccinations in general, the real issues deal with mandates and what we are actually putting into our bodies and more importantly our children’s bodies.
The place to start is the federal agency called the Center for Disease Control (CDC), which controls vaccinations as well as many other things. There have been books written about the corruption and mismanagement of this agency in this area as well as others including the way they handled Ebola. In the case of vaccines the record is very clear that the people making the decisions on various vaccines were actually profiting from those decisions; to the point where people were leaving the agency as multi-millionaires. One very simple example, when I was a kid I think I received 3 vaccinations and now kids are receiving 36. Shouldn’t someone be asking questions about this? The CDC is not only NOT asking, they are keeping critical data sealed so no one can have access. On top of that Congress passed legislation several years ago to keep them protected from real investigations.
The issue is not the vaccine itself; it is the chemicals they put in the vaccine to extend the life of the product which are mercury and aluminum. I have believed for some time that there is a real link between vaccinations and autism, and it is connected to these two chemicals. Unfortunately the CDC continues to deny any connection and will not allow access to the data which would either prove or disprove the assertion. Our frustration is we are not allowed access to the hard science we need and should have access to. It should also be pointed out there is no accountability, as the CDC is both judge and jury in the matter.
Why this issue is of greater importance in Oregon at the moment is because of Senate Bill 442, which would require all kids to get all 36 of these vaccinations as a condition of attending school. No other country has the protocol’s we have and the health status of kids in most European countries is better than ours. For example, we require a Hepatitis B vaccination at birth. Not only is that putting a dangerous amount of aluminum into a baby, there is also the question of why vaccinate at birth for a disease that can only be transmitted through blood or sex.
There is an overarching issue at stake here and that is personal freedom. I think it would be safe to say that the people who support SB 442 honestly believe they know more about what is good for children and they should be the ones making these decisions rather than the parents. There is also legislation, SB 321 which would require all kids to enroll in school at age 5. Once again saying the State knows what is in the best interest of children than the parents do. In this area I think the goal is actually to get the State involved in children’s lives as early as age three, but this is the first step.
At this point SB 442 has been pulled from the committee agenda, but this does not mean it may not re-appear. The point I want to emphasize is that we are seeing an erosion of our personal freedoms. Most of this is being done under the cover of “what is in our best interest.” I personally believe people should be able to live their lives with as little intrusion by government as possible. A lot of freedom has already been lost. We all need to be vigilant as to what they will try to take away from us next.
Sincerely,
Senator Jeff Kruse
To Joseph B. I read your post and have a question about anarchism and mob rule. Could they be the same thing or one leads to the other? I always see red flags when I hear people talk about “states rights”, as it has the potential to infringe on the rights of the minority. IE: African-Americans, Gays, minor political parties. Just wrestling with this. Or is all of this just part of the process of human nature.
And many happy returns.
Today is Dr. Don Grundmann’s Birthday. Yesterday was Phil Davison’s Birthday. Happy Birthday to both!
Halloran is generally identified as a Republican or Republican-Conservative.
As you know, those are recognized parties in NY while the LP is not.
Privately, he often said that being on our line made the difference in his getting elected. I am not sure if that is true or if he was just being gracious.
Wow, that is just the kind of publicity that the Libertarian Party does not need.
Former NYC Councilman Dan Halloran, elected on a fusion Republican-Conservative-Independence-Libertarian ticket, has been sentenced to 10 years for his role in the Malcolm Smith bribery case.
What a shame.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/city-councilman-dan-halloran-10-years-prison-article-1.2137614
“ceded veterans issues to the Modern Whig Party”
I’m pretty sure that to the extent there’s any such thing as “veterans issues,” they’re still mainly handled by the Democratic and Republican parties.
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2014/11/veterans-party-of-america-announces-strategy-for-future-elections/
Short answer: yes.
Long answer: There used to be a Veterans Party of America that ran some candidates, but they folded & ceded veterans issues to the Modern Whig Party. Then this new VPA came along, and it’s very unclear as to whether it’s a new party, or a reconstitution of the new party with a more right-leaning platform. They’ve yet to field any candidates that I’m aware of, but say that in the future they will focus on local races, and may endorse a presidential ticket.
Kind of, sort of.
Is the Veterans Party of America really a thing?
https://www.facebook.com/VeteransPartyOfAmerica
Separate articles coming up later. In the meantime:
http://insomniaclibertarian.blogspot.com/2015/03/libertarians-at-cpac-2015.html
http://www.lp.org/blogs/wes-benedict/report-on-students-for-liberty-event
Just retook the ISideWith test. The new U.S. results: Libertarian 93%, Green 85%, Democratic 73%, Constitution 68%, Conservative 51%, Socialist 36%, Republican 34%
For UK: Liberal Democrat 79%, Plaid Cymru 76%, Green 73%, UKIP 68%, Sinn Fein 67%, Conservative 63%, Scottish National 61%, British National 34%, Democratic Unionist 30%
I think I’ll suggest more U.S. political parties for their drop down option. I’m glad they include the Socialists, if the Conservative Party is the same one they’re using the logo for then that party doesn’t even run candidates.
If you expect perfection or anything close to it from yourself, anyone else, any relationship or family or association – you are bound to be disappointed. If you bottle it up – you are bound to blow up and/or quit. Speak your piece and continue to try to improve anything you are involved with, but don’t ever expect it to be perfect. That’s the best I have been able to come up with.
I saw this on the LP of Florida page:
“Any news from Adrian Wyllie? Isn’t it court day for him in Collier?”
Can someone keep an eye on this? I have meetings most of the afternoon.
Only one LNC motion, as far as I know, concerned something upheld by the body and allegedly tried to overturn it, with the ruling of the chair being appealed and sustained by that exact same narrow margin. I don’t understand the mystery here. Please point the 2012 convention action that the LNC allegedly contradicted and sustained an appealed ruling of the chair by that exact same margin named in the petition.
I should probably just call them the Starr puppets.
Tyler Smith, lawyer for the Burke puppets, was just elected vice-chair of the ORP:
http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2015/02/oregon_repulicans_choose_new_l.html#incart_river
” An interesting question is *which* convention decision is being defended (so to speak).
The one sustained by 7-6 where the ruling of the chair that the motion was in order was upheld”
Your heart is in the right place, but the answer misses the point. The 7-6 was an *LNC* decision, so it cannot possibly be the convention decision at question. The question is which *convention* decision they are tying it to. For example, you give one. It could also be being tied to the 2012 convention decision recognizing the Reeves group as the affiliate.
Gary Johnson told me he agreed with himself about 95% on the quiz. I wish I could agree with myself with such a high degree of precision 🙂
isidewith.com is neat and fun, and not a bad tool for Libertarians, but results should be taken with a grain of salt, as with any political quiz. Last year I was kind of amused to surprised that I only agreed ~85% with my own campaign. Their input data is based on their (sometimes flawed) reading and summation of the official party platforms, which themselves are an imperfect measure of where a party and its individual candidates really stand (nobody looks to the 2012 GOP and Dem platforms, for pretty much anything.). By ascribing so many detailed positions to entire parties, it assumes none of the generality and diversity than actually exists within any given party. That’s why the Presidential candidate quizzes, based on actual answers from individual candidates, are superior to the party-based versions I think.
For example last I checked they had “state’s rights” as the LP position on marriage, which isn’t really a position taken by either side of the intra-Libertarian debate on that issue, nor is it in line with the section of the platform they cited to support it. That’s just one issue for one party, I’m sure there are others.
I didn’t save the exact results, but I had Labour as better than Tories and UKIP, much as I expected.
That is odd. I think my results had the nationalist parties all very low (Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru, SNP, BNP) with UKIP 1st the Tories 2nd the LibDems 3rd and Labour far down the list at 37% or some such.
Found the UK version; Liberal Democrat was the least bad as I expected, with UKIP and Tories at the bottom (also no surprise). Sinn Fein is apparently more libertarian than I knew, as the test had them near the top for me.
“Right, i left comments. It did have me at 85% Green, so it wasn’t terribly inaccurate.
I’m assuming that most people are not going to bother with the additional options or add their own.”- Green_w_o_Adjectives
I did not leave any of my own opinions since it said it would potentially mess with the results but I did select the drop down for all the additional questions. I felt the US version was fairly accurate since it had me at 93% Libertarian. I think the next party for me was at 81% and then 75% and it had me in the mid 30’s for the socialist parties which I thought was about right. My real shock was my score on the UK version coming in at 89% UKIP and my next party being at 82% and the next at 71% and the socialist and nationalist parties in the 30’s and 20’s. How did you come out on the UK version? Since they have a Green MP they seem quite well represented in the survey.
Families too. Are you freaking kidding me? 🙂
“The idea that the LP, much less the US regime, would ever perfectly follow all its own rules is so alien to me that I can’t even begin to figure out how to engage it. ”
Or any given employer, volunteer association — anything larger than a family, I suppose. I continue to expect more of them, but for the rest — I gather I’ve been far too hopeful/naive for far, too long.
You can tell them, or you can create your own quiz. Leaving comments about things they could be doing better here is unlikely to reach them or to get someone else to do what you would like to see done but haven’t done yourself.
Right, i left comments. It did have me at 85% Green, so it wasn’t terribly inaccurate.
I’m assuming that most people are not going to bother with the additional options or add their own. Imho, one would get the highest degree of accuracy is there are 5 concise answers to each question representing 5 party positions.
The ISideWith people are always looking to improve their tests, questions and formulas. I recommend corresponding with them directly.
Actually, ISideWith has additional options and add your own answer options as well. And there were many questions where a libertarian response was not among the default answers at all, which is why I noticed that.
It’s always darkest before the dawn. With today’s technology, darkness may be eliminated completely.
I don’t know the future and neither do the supposed experts.
Not sure what you are asking me to counter. I’ve been a full blown anarchist for about 15 years now, and pretty damn close for a few years before that. The idea that the LP, much less the US regime, would ever perfectly follow all its own rules is so alien to me that I can’t even begin to figure out how to engage it. I come from places and times where rules were always made to be broken, that’s how I grew up; I can’t comprehend any other way 🙂
No idea.
If I ever get old maybe I’ll know.
😛
I agree that they are likely to win, but what is this $6k you are talking about? This I am not aware of.
The one sustained by 7-6 where the ruling of the chair that the motion was in order was upheld
Here is the sequence of events, correct me if I am wrong. Yes, I am aware there are other things that come before 1 here but bear with me.
1) Geoff Neale ruled that it was in order for the entire body of the convention to add people that the Oregon delegation over that delegation’s objection
2) That ruling was upheld by the delegates, and they then seated the unwanted people, who then outvoted and took over the delegation
3) After the convention, Nick Sarwark proposed to the LNC to apologize for Geoff’s ruling that the motion to add delegates that Oregon did not want to Oregon was in order
4) This was challenged as being out of order under the bylaws because the body sustained Geoff’s ruling
5) A narrow majority ruled that Nick’s motion was in order. <-- This is what is currently being appealed to JC 6) Nick's motion lost 7) Dan Wiener proposed a weaker apology which the Wagner side considers to be a non-apology. It passed, but will not have the effect that Nick's motion was intended to achieve, which was to keep LPO from seceding from the LNCGiven 6, I can only conclude that appealing 5 is only so that the new JC can issue a broader ruling.Which I predicted months ago. I don't feel like finding where, but it was on IPR.
The current ISideWith formula lacks credibility and is overly slanted to Libertarian imho.
For example, the data interpreter said I sided with Libertarians on health care, presumably because I oppose Obamacare. But I support single-payer.
An honest quiz would have each party contribute a short answer to each question and the quiz-taker picks which answer they like best….
Most likely there is a better quiz out there. if there isn’t, maybe IPR should sponsor one!
Always glad to be able to help.
Wes,
Gee . . . um . . .thanks . . .
“America is currently in or about to enter a Fourth Turning . . . including financial collapse, a protracted war on terror, a crisis of weapons proliferation, an environmental crisis, an energy shortage, new civil wars abroad.”
This level of comfort coming from you, at least in my experience of you, is unprecedented.
Thanks. I feel so much better now.
🙂
Joe
The 4th Turning is coming?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theory
More advocation of mob rule, tyranny of democracy, over consistent stand for and articulation of those pesky self-evident, inalienable, LIBERTY LOVING PRINCIPLES.
sigh.
Majorities are great (I suppose) for voting on which movie to watch together, but they are terrible at creating a culture of respect for individual rights — while no given individual may advocate for it, as a group they love power over principle.
It seems to be the path of all governments (more and more I lean toward anarchist, more kindly phrased as “radical voluntaryist” philosophy). It seems no check, no balance, no boundaries actually prevent infinite government expansion, not only for our $25+ trillion in debt federal, TSA-ish overlords, but even within the heart of the LP as well.
Paulie? Nick? Wes? Anyone got a dose of optimism to counter my growing resignation and cynicism? Is this just a natural side-effect of feeling/growing old?
🙂
joe
Oregon going to JudComm again .See two previous posts.
An interesting question is *which* convention decision is being defended (so to speak). An obvious choice is the decision of the 2012 convention to seat the Reeves faction as the legitimate delegation. The 2014 convention does not do very much, since the convention decision was to seat the legitimate Wagner faction (and then add people to it.)
If they get their complaint in front of the committee, which requires about 125 LP sustaining members, which requires around $6000 to procure, the Lieberman etc. faction is rather certain to win.
Well, so far the “you’re signing the petition by liking this Facebook page” Facebook page has 13 likes. That’s pretty short of the requirement to petition the Judicial Committee.
That said, if they do get their complaint in front of the committee, and if the committee gives them what they want, all state LPs should withdraw affiliation from the LNC and form a new umbrella to operate under.
I didn’t say “will,” I said “should.”
It’s not really an if, that will happen next month when they have their state convention.
The petition to JudCom is the salvo that I was expecting and had predicted to have the JudCom issue a broad based ruling overturning the previous JudCom decision and ordering LPHQ/LNC to recognize the Burke/Reeves faction, which I expect JudCom will do given its composition and chairmanship.
I can’t believe they’re bringing this up, more than six months later. They only have the two “wins” from the conventions (although I maintain the delegates didn’t thoroughly understand what was going on when they voted), so they just keep trying to remind everyone about it.
Has anyone asked Aaron Starr if he will finance the new quest for ballot access that will happen when and if the recognized Libertarian Party of Oregon leaves the national party due to this nonsense?
And the people who voted that it was in order disagreed with the argument that conflicted with the decision of the delegates, it said the delegates should not have been put into a position to have to vote on it to begin with.
Yes it was about Oregon.
Thanks for pointing that FB page out, George. Since both Aaron and Lieberman “liked” it, I might assume the issue had to do with Oregon.
LOL.
LNC JudComm Petitioned
https://www.facebook.com/lpintegrity/timeline
There should be a prize for the most creative interpretation.
PETITION TO THE LIBERTARIAN PARTY JUDICIAL COMMITTEE
On June 29, 2014, the Libertarian National Committee met in Columbus, Ohio. A point of order was raised that no action of the LNC may alter or conflict with any decision made by the delegates assembled in convention. The motion conflicting with the decision of the delegates was ruled in order, despite the point of order. The decision was appealed. The LNC voted 7-6 to sustain the ruling.
This decision of the LNC that it has the power to overturn decisions of the delegates assembled in convention must be overturned by the Judicial Committee. It is a dangerous precedent that must not be allowed to stand. The delegates assembled in convention must remain the ultimate authority of the Libertarian Party. We, by having clicked Like on this Facebook page, declare our support for and by this action sign this petition to the Judicial Committee of the Libertarian Party to overturn the decision of the LNC sustaining the ruling upholding this illegal motion.
I thought I posted a comment, but it somehow vanished. I may have pressed the wrong buttons (8^((
I repeat my comment
George Phillies Let me repeat that, in case my first comment did not get through. Which LNC motion are you claiming violated which convention action? Be nice to the poor JudComm, which has to figure out what you mean.
I agree. They may be open to suggestions.
I read it now. Good commentary, worth a look. I’d need to come up with an angle to be able to repost it as an article here.
It sounds like the ISideWith people need to code in response for the Libertarian Party of the UK.
“Is there a link for the UK version?”
It’s at the very bottom of the page.
Is there a link for the UK version?
That’s very close to my results.
I believe the percentages were Libertarian 96%, Green 83%, Constitution 71%, Democratic 70%, Republican 59%. I like those political test things, they’re sort of neat.
“I believe this has been covered before BUT… The other day I took the “iSideWith” quiz for both the US and the UK. I came out 93% Libertarian for the US quiz (which was no surprise) but I came out 89% UKIP which was a big surprise. Has anyone else taken this quiz? I would be interested to know if my results were just a fluke.”
1. Libertarian
2. Green
3. Constitution
4. Democratic
5. Republican
Haven’t done the British one but I imagine if I lived in the UK I’d grudgingly be a Lib-Dem.
Libertarian in the US, Green Party second and Republicans dead last. I haven’t seen it on the isidewith quiz site, but Liberal Democrat in the UK if the LP of the UK wasn’t an option. I’m not a UKIP fan at all.
Thanks, I’ll take a look.
I believe this has been covered before BUT… The other day I took the “iSideWith” quiz for both the US and the UK. I came out 93% Libertarian for the US quiz (which was no surprise) but I came out 89% UKIP which was a big surprise. Has anyone else taken this quiz? I would be interested to know if my results were just a fluke.
See the latest from Saturn’s Repository:
A Commentary on Net Neutrality
Phil Davison: A Politician’s Lament
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7dnxYtr0t4
Goddamned Kemp, always making the Jeopardy writers accept two answers. 😉
I did not cheat BTW, only looked it up after I guessed 🙂
Wikipedia also says
Overall, Mitt Romney holds the record of winning more CPAC straw polls than any other individual, with four. Ronald Reagan, Jack Kemp and Rand Paul follow with three consecutive wins each, followed by Ron Paul with two wins. Of these five, the Pauls are the only two to win more than one straw poll, yet never appear on a Republican presidential ticket in any election.
Kemp and Reagan would also be correct. Probably Romney for Reagan, but I would have to check. Maybe Rand Paul for Kemp and/or Reagan? Dunno.
wikipedia sez:
1976 Ronald Reagan[46][47] —
1980 Ronald Reagan —
1984 Ronald Reagan —
1986 Jack Kemp[48][49] —
1987 Jack Kemp[50] 68%
1993 Jack Kemp[51] —
1995 Phil Gramm[52] —
1998 Steve Forbes[53] 23%
1999 Gary Bauer[54] —
2000 George W. Bush[55] 42%
2005 Rudy Giuliani[56] —
2006 George Allen[57] 22%
2007 Mitt Romney[57] 21%
2008 Mitt Romney[57] 35%
2009 Mitt Romney[57][58] 20%
2010 Ron Paul[57][59] 31%
2011 Ron Paul[60] 30%
2012 Mitt Romney[61] 38%
2013 Rand Paul[62] 25%
2014 Rand Paul[63] 31%
2015 Rand Paul 26%
Ding ding ding, we have a winner.
Nick:
Rand Paul and Mitt Romney?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHQ1y3LxhDc
Celebrity Republican Jeopardy
This three-time consecutive CPAC winner campaigned for this previous three-time consecutive CPAC winner.
Who are _____ and _____?
Bloody right…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIkNWCTKVjU