On its website, the Libertarian Party is conducting a poll on possible slogans for the 2010 Libertarian National Convention, to be held in St. Louis, Missouri, May 28-31. The options:
123 Comments
Comments are closed.
September 18, 2026
Your Premier Source on Third Parties and Independent Candidates Since 2008
On its website, the Libertarian Party is conducting a poll on possible slogans for the 2010 Libertarian National Convention, to be held in St. Louis, Missouri, May 28-31. The options:
Comments are closed.
or ‘Democrats Are Wonderful’ [per the inspiring news this fall:]
By Associated Press Writers Larry Margasak And Laurie Kellman,
– 1 hr 4 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Democrats nervously anticipating Rep. Charles Rangel’s ethics trial know all about the media frenzy and negative ads accompanying election-season scandals.
They generated it themselves in 2006, when Republican Rep. Mark Foley was forced to resign in disgrace.
Foley’s misdeeds stemmed from his dealings with House pages and efforts by Republicans, then in the majority, to ignore and cover them up.
Rangel’s ethics charges raise questions about his management of money and taxes and his official role — and pose difficult choices for the party that won its majority in large part by vowing to run the most ethical Congress in history.
[yeah, right, sure —– it was not all GOP garbage smelling up the republic!]
Of course, “Dont’ Tread on Me” is the best slogan of any of the above, far and away, for these reasons:
1) It is a historically All-American slogan
2) It accurately describes the Libertarian Party’s position
3) It is more timely now than ever, in the “age of Obama” –appealing to anyone who isn’t a socialist in a general manner
4) It encourages a second look at the LP, and the group of people flying all the gadsden flags
5) It reminds people of their earliest anti-government sentiment
6) It is unambiguously anti-government, yet neither “left” nor “right” in its political “leaning”
7) It takes the place of some slogans that are goofy or politically inept. (It’s a good “compromise position” that doesn’t really lose any ground.)
Mr. Witmer,
Thanks for sharing.
Feel better, or just bitter?
Are we on to the 2012 slogan yet? After all, we’ve got to have priorities in the LP! (And all the better for the LP if they’re highly obtuse and theoretical and it doesn’t matter who wins!)
A good slogan if the people on this board don’t get more educated about the petitioning process, and the ballot access process, and don’t learn to care about the petitioning process more:
“Rape Me”
(Look at it this way, it’s already had a lot of radio play, thanks to Nirvana, and the taxpayers might sympathize. Plus, it reflects the defeated nature of a Party too tired and stupid to stick up for what’s right. It also well represents Scott Kohlhaas’s 50% commission on fundraising.)
Or maybe, “Give me Liberty, Or Give Me a Really Bad Dutch Rub!” (from a famous Far Side comic where Patrick Henry is trying out various slogans…)
After all, I think most libertarians would endure a pretty nasty dutch rub for liberty!
Or maybe we could use obtuse non-English words that noone is familiar with:
Agora, Anarchy, Action, Authoritarian Antagonism, Asinine Abruptness, Against Alimentarius Codex, Anarcho-Capitalism, Accrues Capital!
Agoris, Haggis, Excommunicatus!
Or my favorite Libertarian slogan:
“Well, you see, libertarianism is more of an educational movement than an electoral movement because education solves the larger problem of allowing a freer market, which results in greater counter-economic activity, rendering the violence inherent in the system obsolete…”
(That way, we couldn’t be charged with false advertising when the resultant 15 people showed up to their local LP meetings nationwide.)
Give Me Liberty
“On the contrary, you most manifestly have been accused of fraud, and not just by me.”
Gary may have been ACC– USED, but that doesn’t mean that he was guilty of anything, because he was not.
“LP Observer // Aug 25, 2009 at 12:45 am
LOL.
Wrong, Fincher, I am not Sean Haugh. Nice guess though, but you pulled it out of your ass. FAIL.”
The only reason that anyone has to guess who you are is because you are too CHICKENSHIT to post under your real name. You talk shit while hiding like a COWARD.
“Laugh all you want but you better get used to it – this is going to be every day from now on. Just look at the recently, successfully concludes Green Party petition in New York. Were you or any of the loser/whiner/fraudster team invited? No. That will be the case next time there is a petition drive too, and every time after that.”
Yes, I think that it is quite laughable that the recent Green Party petition drive in New York only needed 7,500 valid signatures but had to turn in 18,359 raw signatures. This obviously means that they were banking on their validity being BELOW 50%. That’s pathetic!
“Better start practicing your new line for work…’would you like fries with that?'”
That’s odd, because there are campaigns in 3 states which are vying for my services right now. In fact, I had a proponent call me up yesterday to try to get me to come and work on their petition drive.
As long as there are people who want high quality petition signature gathering my services in this area will always be in demand.
“It was even said he wrote a nice goodby on the lp.org.”
If he has, it has not appeared yet. You may be thinking of Austin Petersen:
http://www.lp.org/blogs/austin-petersen/my-goodbye-letter-to-the-libertarian-party
It hasn’t. It’s all rumors at this point.
Also, it now has its own separate thread.
I heard Donny Fergerson wasn’t fired, but gave notice to move on to other things. So how was this confirmed. It was even said he wrote a nice goodby on the lp.org.
It would be awesome if the LP actually went with something as radical as Don’t Tread On Me. I’m not holding my breath, though.
Is there going to be a run-off poll, so that one of the slogans can get a majority of votes?
“Well, sounds like the two of you are in cahoots.”
If by “you two,” you mean myself and “LP Observer,” then no, we aren’t “in cahoots.” I have no idea who the person posting under that moniker is.
“I have very real scoops on Knapp, and it’s not hidden in any way.”
Like I said, feel free to elaborate.
“Just check out his own writings on here and it will be abundantly clear. That man is a criminal, a liar, a thief and a fraud if I ever saw one.”
I’m certainly a criminal, or at least have been (I can’t think of anyone offhand who isn’t or hasn’t been). So is anyone who’s ever driven a mile over the speed limit or smoked a joint. I don’t place a lot of stock in that allegation.
As for what I’ve been convicted of:
– A few traffic tickets over the years. No DWI or reckless driving or anything like that. Two or three speeding tickets, one expired license, and I think maybe one “failure to produce proof of insurance” (I had insurance, but couldn’t find the card — I seem to recall that that one may have been cleared up by bringing my policy to the courthouse, though).
– Article 113 (“Misbehavior of sentinel or lookout”), Uniform Code of Military Justice, in 1991 at Headquarters Marine Corps, Southwest Asia. In particular, I was found guilty in Article 15 proceedings (“non-judicial punishment”) of sleeping on post. I was not guilty and the commanding officer administering the proceedings knew I wasn’t guilty. The accusing officer retracted his testimony, stated that he had not in fact actually seen me asleep, and admitted that there had been conflicting orders given on whether or not to challenge the Officer of the Guard when he approach posts from within the compound — his allegation had been based entirely on not being challenged when he approached a bunker, in which I and another Marine were manning a gun and watching a fenceline, from the rear. I provided witnesses from other posts who testified that in fact they heard the accusing officer’s voice over my own voice on the comm wire at the time the officer approached the bunker. However, there was a “head hunt” on, some guilty verdicts had to be handed out, and I wasn’t upset enough about it to demand a court martial. The sentence (some pay and some “restriction to barracks” time in a place where the alternative to barracks during the 2 or 3 hours free per week was a bunch of empty sand) was suspended and I was promoted a few days later.
Contrary to rumors spread by a mentally unstable LNC national secretary, no, I have never been convicted of a felony. I was charged with felony non-support in 2004. Under threat of revocation of bail by a rogue prosecutor if I went to trial, I accepted a plea bargain in which sentence was suspended and no conviction was entered.
“Notice how, by contrast, I have never even been ACC– USED of theft or fraud.”
On the contrary, you most manifestly have been accused of fraud, and not just by me.
Oh and Haugh, the answer to your question is: none. (But I’ll bet there’s one out for you!)
None (it usually goes that way for law-abiding citizens).
Well, sounds like the two of you are in cahoots.
Notice that I’m not coward enough to hide behind a fake identity (when I use a screen name it’s obvious it’s me), nor do I resort to using profanity.
I have very real scoops on Knapp, and it’s not hidden in any way. Just check out his own writings on here and it will be abundantly clear. That man is a criminal, a liar, a thief and a fraud if I ever saw one.
Notice how, by contrast, I have never even been ACC– USED of theft or fraud. This is in no way coinciidental.
I readily admit to the things for which I have ever been charged with: driving without a seat belt, speeding, trying to vote Libertarian in a Democrat stronghold).
These do not include crimes involving initiation of force, or ones that would be a crime in a libertarian society.
Sorry, straw-graspers – but you have nothing on me.
“And I thought I told you to get off here, Knapp”
Last time I looked, you were neither my employer, nor above me in any military chain of command, nor my mom … so I don’t take orders from you. I do, however, have a suggestion for you: Go fuck yourself.
My identity isn’t any of your business, Fincher, but thanks for playing. We have some lovely parting gifts for you, etc.
I see you don’t have jack shit on Knapp, either. Just as I suspected. If you’re gonna bluff, you need a better poker face, LOL.
Speaking of being behind bars, how many warrants do you have out for your arrest and in how many states right now, Gary? People who live in glass houses such as yourself would be well advised not to start stone-throwing contests…
And I thought I told you to get off here, Knapp; you were part of what I meant about criminals coming out of the woodwork to take up for your ilk due to my whistleblowing?
Be gone and good riddance.
Haugh, I wasn’t wrong on your identity, as I’ve noticed you haven’t come clean (you would if you weren’t Haugh).
And Knapp, wrong-o – you haven’t called a liar a liar, not that I’m aware of. Unless, of course, you’ve called yourself on it.
And I’m not surprised at all that you’ve been behind bars before – but it sure looks like you will be again with the nefarious plots you’re up to as we speak.
You know damn well that I’m the one with no skeletons in the closet. I’ve always been able to stand scrutiny and my good record speaks for itself.
Quoth Fincher:
“It does sound to me like Knapp has been involved in a lot of fraudulent and nefarious activity that I’m finally starting to catch on to, so this explains his renewed smears on me (as I get closer to moving in on the kill), so it’s not surprising that the smears would accelerate. Once Knapp gets behind bars, all will be quiet on the front.”
By all means, please feel free to elaborate. I’m unaware of any skeletons in my closet that I haven’t already brought out for a turn around the public dance floor myself — but if I’ve forgotten or missed any, let’s get’em out there.
I can’t say with any certainty that I’ll never be behind bars again, but I can’t think of anything which is likely to put me there in the foreseeable future. Last time I checked, calling a liar a liar isn’t a crime.
LOL.
Wrong, Fincher, I am not Sean Haugh. Nice guess though, but you pulled it out of your ass. FAIL.
Given this FAIL I am not very optimistic about the veracity of whatever you think you have on Knapp, but it would be entertaining to hear what it is, just for shits and giggles.
I think that chances are heavy that you are bluffing.
Or are you busy forging “evidence” even as we speak? That would certainly be par for the course for you. You know, forging, lying, making shit up – all that kind of stuff.
Nice to know that you got Jacobs conned into being your friend again after you ripped him off for $10,000, I guess some people never learn. I wonder if you will get him for some more money again. LOL.
I guess life will suck for you now that you will no longer be allowed to work on petitions as word is spreading about you and your criminal associates. Maybe you’ll finally kill yourself this time. After all Jacobs will not be able to lend you very much money when he is working at Burger King. Got anyone else to leech off? Maybe you can get food stamps and general assistance.
mdh: “Gary hasn’t. It’s unfortunate, because hearing the same crap over and over again is not only mildly annoying, but it also gives those of us who have reason to care (ie, those of us who are in a position to hire petitioners) a very bad impression of Gary.”
This is fraudulent and misleading, for several reasons.
One, no one who isn’t a criminal has a “bad impression” of me. Petition managers all have very good things to say about me and my work:
http://libertycrusader.wordpress.com/references/
Also, the one who is sick and tired of hearing about this is ME – as Sean Haugh just struck again this last month (impetus for my video).
You might be a wimpy doormat, mdh, but me thinks any MAN worth his salt will not stand by idly and let a known criminal prey off him without fighting back. Your whining about my fighting back tells me thata YOU would just let yourself get molested, and then just bend over and invite more. However, your chosen course of action is NOT necessarily the one others will and shall take.
Clear enough, mdh?
(BTW, “LP Observer” is Sean Haugh in alias form, just FYI)
pathetic
Apparently, whenever you blow the whistle on a criminal, scads of other criminals come out of the woodwork to try to discredit the whistleblower. It’s to be expected, and comes with the territory. And this explains why I’m not surprised at all the smear comments toward me on this blog.
All I can do is continue to tell the truth, as I have always done, and stand up for principle and not allow myself to get stolen from (which is how this all started in the first place with the criminal Haugh).
It does sound to me like Knapp has been involved in a lot of fraudulent and nefarious activity that I’m finally starting to catch on to, so this explains his renewed smears on me (as I get closer to moving in on the kill), so it’s not surprising that the smears would accelerate. Once Knapp gets behind bars, all will be quiet on the front. It’s disappointing to see all the juvenile jokesters on here rush to join him on his wongheaded bandwagon – when I would have expected more maturity and manners out of some of you folks, so I’m disappointed.
Salutes to Peter Orvetti, Andy Jacobs and Jake Witmer for keeping it sensible and rational, and sticking to the facts and principle. Hats off to you.
And yes, Peter, it would have been nice to have thhis be on its own thead, although in my opinion, most of this shouldn’t have been said at all, and I would have discouraged Knapp from making himself look foolish by making such ridiculous claims (such as no such thing as solicitation of a crime) in a comment to my video.
mdh: “how Gary has been behaving here”
How I am behaving here?!?
Good god, get a life – it’s obvious from all the juvenile smear comments prevalent here that I’m the only one here behaving like a rational human being and adult, except for Jacobs, Witmer and Orvetti, from what I can tell.
Donny Ferguson got fired? now theres something new at least. anyone know why?
damn . . . I was rooting for none of the above
still, da yellow flags are good, n best color for LP too
Final results:
“Don’t Tread on Me”
32% (510 votes)
“Gateway to Freedom”
7% (111 votes)
“Gateway to Liberty”
20% (312 votes)
“Legalize Prosperity”
18% (279 votes)
“Show Me Freedom”
12% (185 votes)
None of the above slogans
12% (195 votes)
Total votes: 1592
http://www.lp.org/staff
In other news it appears that Donny Ferguson has been fired at LPHQ.
“More and more the word is getting out to political parties, candidates and organizations to steer far clear of fraudulent troublemakers like Gary Fincher and hire responsible and successful petitition managers like Sean Haugh instead.”
LOL!!! Is today opposites day or something?!?!?!
Laugh all you want but you better get used to it – this is going to be every day from now on. Just look at the recently, successfully concludes Green Party petition in New York. Were you or any of the loser/whiner/fraudster team invited? No. That will be the case next time there is a petition drive too, and every time after that.
Better start practicing your new line for work…”would you like fries with that?” 🙂
“More and more the word is getting out to political parties, candidates and organizations to steer far clear of fraudulent troublemakers like Gary Fincher and hire responsible and successful petitition managers like Sean Haugh instead.”
LOL!!! Is today opposites day or something?!?!?!
“I regard Jake Witmer rather highly, although I disagree with him on a lot of things. Jake got screwed last year by the LP/Barr campaign, and with seemingly some justification pins that screwing (and the Barr campaign’s ballot access failures) on Shane Cory and Sean Haugh. This appears to have clouded his judgment vis a vis Fincher. I’m sure he’ll eventually discover his errror, though. Hopefully he won’t get taken too badly before he does.”
Jake KNOWS that Gary is one of the best petitioners in the country and has also been a hardcore libertarian activist for over 20 years, so don’t expect him to fall for your bullshit, Knapp.
“mdh // Aug 24, 2009 at 12:55 pm
LPO,
Andy isn’t Gary’s buddy anymore. Gary apparently took Andy for a $10,000 ride.”
Gary and I resumed speaking regularly again weeks ago. Gary and I both communicate with Jake on a regular basis as well. Gary, Jake, and myself are all in agreement on these issues.
The reason that Gary put up these YouTube videos about Sean Haugh is because it recently came to Gary’s attention that Sean Haugh had trash talked & spread false rumors about him to members of the Libertarian Party of Arizona. This cut Gary out of work for several weeks which means that he lost money in opportunity costs. Fortunately, Gary found out about what happened and was able to clear the air, but this does not erase the damage that was done.
Some of you people out there who have read about this stuff on blogs and message boards might think that this is “old news” but it is not. Sean Haugh is still out there causing problems.
I have watched this Sturm und Drang over the paid petitioner process since 1979. It is counter productive and not necessary for truly qualified candidates.
mdh,
According to Andy, Haugh was involved in the events which upset Witmer:
http://www.ballot-access.org/2008/10/02/libertarians-file-connecticut-ballot-access-lawsuit/#comment-530528
Tom, as far as I know, Sean wasn’t involved in the states where Jake worked… that’s just my own recollections though.
Jake is very into jury nullification, which I think is a cool issue for us.
Pathetic. Talk about arguments over deck chair arrangements on the Titanic. If these guys had been in charge they would have been so busy arguing about what songs the musicians should play while the ship is going down they would have forgotten to lower the life boats.
Oops. My mistake. In the absence of government regulations there would have been no lifeboats since their presence would have contradicted the advertising campaign promoting the ship as unsinkable.
mdh,
You write:
“As far as Jake, I know Jake fairly well and he’s always come across as a lot more mature and intelligent than someone who’d want anything to do with how Gary has been behaving here.”
I regard Jake Witmer rather highly, although I disagree with him on a lot of things. Jake got screwed last year by the LP/Barr campaign, and with seemingly some justification pins that screwing (and the Barr campaign’s ballot access failures) on Shane Cory and Sean Haugh. This appears to have clouded his judgment vis a vis Fincher. I’m sure he’ll eventually discover his errror, though. Hopefully he won’t get taken too badly before he does.
I am really sick of the spam. Can blatant spam (comments posted verbatim on multiple threads which have no relevance to said threads) be deleted? Otherwise, I think I’ll start selling viagra on the web and begin posting about my site here, or something.
LP 2010: Circular firing squad, commence fire!
I see the loser crew is back.
Gary – the woman beating slob who forged voter registrations in New Mexico
Paul – the convicted felon, rapist, child molester and crackhead who forged signatures in Oregon
Andy – the original inspiration for the character in the 40 year old virgin. He hasn’t been caught forging yet, but since he hangs around with Gary and Paul there is a pretty high probability that he is a forger just like his loser friends. He always acts crazy and has to be removed by police because he petitions at grocery stores without permission and yells at people.
Andy is currently stalking a young woman in Tennessee. He recently had to be fired from the voter registration drive in Arizona for deranged behavior and low quality work.
All three have been fired in North Carolina and then again nationally by Sean Haugh, who is by far the best political director the Libertarian Party has ever had.
Paul is now on the executive committee of the Alabama LP even though he is actually a homeless bum who hitchhikes all over the country and posts lies and slanders here against Sean Haugh, Christina Tobin, Angela Keaton, Richard Winger, Michelle Shinghal, Scott Kohlhaas and ElfNinosMom – all due to petty jealousy against his betters. Incidentally he is also a plagiarist.
Roger Pope and Joe Knight have the straight scoop on these guys. They should be blackballed from petition drives, kicked off this website like they were at Last Free Voice, and ostracized at party meetings.
All petition contracts should go to Free and Equal and competent petitioners like Eric Dondero, David Jackson, Ronn Cook, Edee and Russ Baggett and Darryl Bonner.
The GAP boys are now turning on each other here over money. Don’t trust them, and don’t hire Mark Pickens who is just a front for them.
LPO,
Andy isn’t Gary’s buddy anymore. Gary apparently took Andy for a $10,000 ride.
As far as Jake, I know Jake fairly well and he’s always come across as a lot more mature and intelligent than someone who’d want anything to do with how Gary has been behaving here. That’s just my personal take on him though.
Wow. It looks like Gary Fincher is not very popular here. Does anyone besides his buddies Andy and Jake take his side anymore?
It looks like he just digs his hole even deeper every time he types his tripe yet again or records another video.
More and more the word is getting out to political parties, candidates and organizations to steer far clear of fraudulent troublemakers like Gary Fincher and hire responsible and successful petitition managers like Sean Haugh instead.
In fact I think I’ll go tell three friends and tell them to tell three friends. And for those of you who follow other third parties, Mr. Haugh just finished a successful petition drive to get Rev. Billy Talen on the ballot for Mayor of New York. All without hiring those petitioners who are known troublemakers and fraudsters! Kudos to Mr. Haugh.
Addendum/Erratum: The last paragraph of my previous comment should read:
“Always remember, Mr. Witmer (if, indeed, you did actually write the stuff Mr. Fincher claims to be ‘quoting’ — he has a habit of just making shit up and pretending that others said it), that when dealing with a known and admitted liar like Mr. Fincher, you can’t simply assume that he’s telling the truth. About anything.”
Mr. Fincher writes:
“You claim you are going to get MPP to stop taking my signatures. MPP is going to turn down perfectly valid signatures? Yeah, that’ll happen!”
As is not unusual, Mr. Fincher is lying. What I’ve claimed is that I’m going to talk to MPP donors and encourage them to condition their future contributions upon those contributions not supporting Mr. Fincher.
Fincher, allegedly quoting Jake Witmer:
“Haugh was higher on the chain of command than the state LPers in MA.”
No, he wasn’t. There is no “chain of command” in the LP which places LPHQ employees “above” the state affiliates.
“In your analogy, your wife is not in the vicinity of the Massachusetts legislator.”
My analogy included no wife and no legislator. That was the analogy Fincher manufactured for his impersonation of me.
Always remember, Mr. Witmer, that when dealing with a known and admitted liar like Mr. Fincher, you can’t simply assume that he’s telling the truth. About anything.
Fincher: “Yes, I did edit Knapp’s original comment – for clarity’s sake.”
ADB: So does that mean that Fincher has no objection to IPR editors clarifying Fincher’s comments for clarity?
They could all be changed to read “Hi, I’m here to stroke myself in front of all of you yet again, and I like the fact that it annoys everyone, it helps me to get off. “
Peter, it is frustrating. Most of us who would even remotely have reason to care have heard all sides of the various stories involving the Libertarian petitioner crowd. We’ve made up our minds about who we can and can’t trust, and who is and isn’t a jackass, and moved on. Gary hasn’t. It’s unfortunate, because hearing the same crap over and over again is not only mildly annoying, but it also gives those of us who have reason to care (ie, those of us who are in a position to hire petitioners) a very bad impression of Gary.
Orvetti
“If I created one single special thread for all discussion of this issue, would you all stick to using it? ”
No, because such threads already exist, and they are not using them; for example:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/07/sean-haugh-under-fire-for-giving-instructions-to-burn-petitions/
Knapp: How other could inserting false Social Security numbers on forms be construed other than “the false making or material alteration of or addition to a written instrument for the purpose of deceit and fraud?”
Your previous defense of your actions has been that another party to the transaction was first guilty of deceit, but but that doesn’t magically make your own actions non-deceitful.
ADB: Obviously, it meets the dictionary definition, as you showed.
Quoting Jake Witmer:
Mr Knapp, in closing, I’d like to point out a flaw in your analogy. In your analogy,
1) “You” are not the boss, nor even “next higher on the chain of command” person to the hypothetical Massachusetts legislator. Haugh was higher on the chain of command than the state LPers in MA. In fact, Haugh had given similarly destructive orders to many other state parties, and they had listened to his orders. Moreover, the order itself is the crime, not whether or not it was followed through with. Thank goodness Phillies had the LIBERTARIAN strength of character and mistrust of authority to refuse to follow a direct order from the National LP’s “Political Director” (even one that carried with it a direct and implicit threat of refusal of National LP funds.)
2) In your analogy, your wife is not in the vicinity of the Massachusetts legislator. Both the object of the crime (the signatures) and Sean Haugh’s intended dupes (George Phillies and Carol McMahon) were in the same room. Given Sean’s very real position of command, and history of extreme mood swings, egomaniacal psychosis, and retaliation on behalf of Kohlhaas, the only thing that prevented the second crime from being carried out, was Phillies’ self-control.
3) Free speech is not an element in this. That is a red herring. I understand you’re a speech purist, and so am I. But if I am the police chief and I say “shoot that man”, and one of my subordinates listens to me, then I am properly to be held accountable for the shooting of that man. Similarly, if your hypothetical Massachusetts state legislator has a history of shooting people’s wives when they ask him to, and you have a history of asking people to shoot your wife (and she’s been in and out of the hospital because of that fact), and you ask your legislator friend to shoot your wife, then yes, you would be culpable even if he did not do so. …ESPECIALLY if you were dumb enough to openly forward the email where you called for her assassination to several friends and acquaintances.
(note: Mr. Knapp’s original comment didn’t include as part of the analogy a legislator and his wife, but rather the governor and some kind of kooky idea about a…Dictator of Massachusetts? Yea, I know. LOL. So obviously, I needed to edit for clarity.)
Quoting Jake Witmer:
Tom Knapp’s reply amounts to:
“Gary, can’t you see you’re just annoying people?” (with issues like truth and integrity)
He has a point.
…C’mon Gary, just because Huagh was in a position of authority with a title that indicated his authority, and gave a direct command to someone beneath his title to defraud you and the Libertarian petition signers of Massachusetts, doesn’t mean that he could expect to be listened to! It was all harmless fun, his trying to interfere with your cyclical career so you’d be too broke to work for the LP on the next election cycle! …Lighten up and laugh!
Haugh didn’t teleport himself to Massachusetts and personally burn the signatures, on video, so I guess there’s no malfeasance there!
Seriously, if I am the CEO of a company, and I tell a subordinate to commit perjury, and that subordinate doesn’t commit perjury, then it’s all a big laugh right? I mean, “ha ha”, right? That subordinate would have committed a crime, and been on the hook for the damages caused by his actions, and I would have then been on the hook for giving the order, and both of our careers would have been tarnished with a prison sentence and a criminal record. …But since that subordinate knew enough to reject my malicious order to commit perjury, no harm, no foul, right?
…That’s all that Knapp is saying!
It’s a dangerous world! Ha ha! Better beware those in positions of power giving bad orders, even if they are in a position of authority, because the nuremburg defense, while not valid, IS indicting. (The nazi superiors were not let off the hook simply because their subordinates followed their orders. In fact, the subordinates were even held to a higher standard: the standard of reason. Moreover, the subordinates who refused to follow orders were considered exceptional heroes. Clearly, giving a bad order DOES constitute a crime. I’m amazed Knapp can’t see that in this case! Does he think it’s OK to harass people who have been longtime libertarian activists from a position of authority within the party, and interfere with logically anticipated work? If so, does he expect those activists to be there during the next election cycle? I don’t think so, because Knapp actually apologized to me during this last election cycle, for the wrongs committed against me during 2008. I don’t know why he now de-emphasizes the equally serious wrong attempted against Gary and the MA LP!)
I guess that what Knapp is trying to say is this: Libertarians inhabit a parallel universe, where the standards to which we hold the major parties don’t apply to us, because we have a hip philosophy that not only allows us to treat minimum wage labor badly, but also allows us to smoke pot. Therefore, there’s nothing wrong with us abdicating our promises to you. We promised you (and the other libertarian activists) that you would be hired back first, for a job well done, but that was just “the free market of ideas”(lies, misdirection), taking advantage of your bad ideas (trust, integrity, honor, etc…). Our ideas, on the other hand, were quite profitable. For instance: “Take full advantage of those dumb enough to work for less money due to their ideology, then discard them when they are no longer needed!” (actually, “discard while still needed”, since they failed to access the ballot in 4 states and DC that we had previously worked.)
Ha ha haugh! The joke’s on you, Gary. You worked more effectively and cheaply than other libertarians and expected your work history to speak for itself. But this is politics, and you underestimated the venality and backstabbing you would encounter within the LP. You didn’t think that other libertarians, like the apparently credulous Mr Knapp, would allow such criminal malfeasance in their own party.
Knapp, I thought I told you to shoo! and mind your own business.
Quite bluntly, it is a lie to call me a liar, when you know damn well that’s not the case (as everyone else also knows, so you’re not fooling anyone).
And did you ever stop and think that people trust me for a very good reason?
You claim you are going to get MPP to stop taking my signatures. MPP is going to turn down perfectly valid signatures? Yeah, that’ll happen!
If you try interfering there, people will find out once and for all that YOU aree the one who cannot be trusted. I wish you’d just drop out of the LP (as some of us are starting to suspect yoou of being a “plant”).
Mr. Fincher,
You’re a liar and a poltroon, and I enjoy exposing you as such on occasion. It’s not worth my time to make a full-time job of it, especially since I can take the price of your perfidy out of your hide so easily and with so little time or effort invested.
I made no “empty threat” to sue you. I was very explicit in stating that I hadn’t yet decided whether to do that or to just continue publicly pantsing you every time there’s good reason to do so. The main reason I’ve tentatively decided on the latter, apart from my generally non-litigious nature, is that you’re incapable of doing $80k worth of damage to me (or, for that matter, probably to anyone who’s not foolish enough to trust you in the first place).
Also, Knapp, if I wanted to “pretend” you said something else, why would I edit, and then later reveal the actual kooky thing that you DID say? Why wouldn’t I just simply deny it? (maybe because I’m honest – duh?) After all, it can’t be proven what you actually DID say…could have denied it all day long.
Now, go and stop writing kooky things about others just to maliciously “press their buttons”. You already wimped out on your empty threat to sue me in US Distric t Court, after I offered to HELP you (by HONESTLY giving you accurate and detailed info about myself you could utilize in your suit). You’ve shot your wad on your deceitful smear of me now, even though you were never a party to any of this and it was none of your damn business, so go…get lost. We folks of integrity don’t need you. Shoo!
Oh, and BTW, I’ve been generally referred to as “too honest” or “too honest for my own good” and things of that nature. How the heck my impeccable honesty can get twisted so far around to brushstroke me as “congenitally deceitful” is pretty darn farfetched. I’d say anyone who makes such a stretch has something to hide himself! At least that’s what the psychologists would all say.
Paulie, it doesn’t matter if it was months ago – it was said. I don’t appreciate the implication that it’s false just because of your spam-paranoia in the interim.
And Knapp, I don’t care what you call “bullshit” – forgery is forgery and the insertion of random numbers in a field that’s not mandatory isn’t even close to it, so stop with your maligning attempts that anyone can see are getting you nowhere.
So sorry, Knapp – your deceits have not in any way been logically construed to say that anything of mine is deceitful. Referring to my editing – for clarity’s sake – as “deceitful” is almost laughable. If that’s the case, then every newspaper editor in the country is guilty of deceit. You’re borderline insane – if not already having crossed the border.
Also, how is “admitting” something “lying”? I’m sure more than one person is scratching their head over THAT one.
Quoth Gary Fincher:
“No one has ever known me to lie, or to misrepresent. No one has ever known me to engage in fraud, or forgery, either.”
Bullshit. You’ve publicly admitted to entering false Social Security numbers on voter registration forms. Your chicanery aside with reference to whether or not that constitutes forgery, it constitutes lying and misrepresentation by definition.
“Knapp has been instructed over and over again – even with the help of attorneys – that I never did anything akin to forgery.”
—–
Forgery \For”ger*y\, n.; pl. Forgeries 2) The act of forging, fabricating, or producing falsely; esp., the crime of fraudulently making or altering a writing or signature purporting to be made by another; the false making or material alteration of or addition to a written instrument for the purpose of deceit and fraud; as, the forgery of a bond. –Bouvier. [1913 Webster]
—–
How other could inserting false Social Security numbers on forms be construed other than “the false making or material alteration of or addition to a written instrument for the purpose of deceit and fraud?”
Your previous defense of your actions has been that another party to the transaction was first guilty of deceit, but but that doesn’t magically make your own actions non-deceitful.
“Mr. Knapp is doing his best to assert that there is no such thing as ‘solicitation of a crime’.
Nope. I’ve never asserted any such thing.
“Yes, I did edit Knapp’s original comment – for clarity’s sake.”
No, you edited in order to delete what I’d written and pretend that I’d written something other than what I’d written. No more, no less. You are apparently habitually, or even possibly congenitally, deceitful rather than merely occasionally deceitful. Can’t say I’m surprised.
—–
I challenge anyone to find a single item I have lied about or misrepresented.
—–
I’ve already done that at least twice so far in this post. But thanks for playing.
Best regards,
Tom Knapp
Why is Mr. Knapp being disingenuous? Paulie Cannoli offered one clue, off the record, but I’m not at liberty to discuss it. But if it’s true what Cannoli said, his motivations for smearing me mmake sense. Still immoral amd pathetic, mind you, but make sense.
This must have been months ago, as I stopped talking to Mr. Fincher again then, and spam-blocked him from my email at that time – this time, also including the subject, addressee and body of text fields as well.
I would much appreciate being kept entirely out of this sorry tangent, even by reference.
….Gateway to endless repetitiveness…..
ENOUGH ALREADY!
For many of us, too much is never enough (TM).
“We put the Arch in AnArchy.”
“An Arch, AnArch, our kingdom for anarch.”
JESUS H. CHRIST
What’s the H stand for?
…….cuz I wanna be…..an Arch-V……
I have three suggestions.
First, two for the convention:
“We put the Arch in MinArchy.”
and in the interest of equal time,
“We put the Arch in AnArchy.”
Third, for the 8,546th or so revisit on IPR of the Massachusetts Burning/Psycho Petitioners soap opera (not including paulie):
“St. Louis 2010: the next chapter (or is repeating the last chapter, or one before that, or whatever?)”
(That’s merely a civil version of the statement to Jake, Gary, and Andy, “JESUS H. CHRIST, ENOUGH ALREADY!”)
Knapp is the one that is a liar and a fraud – make no mistake about it.
No one has ever known me to lie, or to misrepresent. No one has ever known me to engage in fraud, or forgery, either.
Knapp has been instructed over and over again – even with the help of attorneys – that I never did anything akin to forgery.
There is also nothing in my video that constitute anything but the truth. Sean Haugh did in fact solicit a crime. Mr. Knapp is doing his best to assert that there is no such thing as “solicitation of a crime”. Either Mr. Knapp is being disingenouous, has been living under a rock all his life and knows nothing of the legal system of the U.S., or is just plain dumb. I’m not sure which.
But I think most of these readers understand that there IS a such thing as “solicitation of a crime”, and the actual intended crime does NOT have to be carried out for intent and solicitation to be present. Thus, Knapp is full of you-know-what.
Sean Haugh admitted to solicitation of this particular crime (destroying signatures he knew would rip me off of thousands of dollars, if achieved). So it’s an open-and-shut case.
Why is Mr. Knapp being disingenuous? Paulie Cannoli offered one clue, off the record, but I’m not at liberty to discuss it. But if it’s true what Cannoli said, his motivations for smearing me mmake sense. Still immoral amd pathetic, mind you, but make sense.
Yes, I did edit Knapp’s original comment – for clarity’s sake. His original comment had something wacky to do with a dictator of a state (Massachusetts) – something that youtube viewers probably wouldn’t be able to understand, so it had to be edited for clarity, in usual & customary terms viewers would be able to relate to. I assure you that his meaning was kept intact – basically driving to a final point that there is no such thing as “solicitation of a crime”. That point of his is easily refutable.
I challenge anyone to find a single item I have lied about or misrepresented.
I think “Republican-Lite: less substance and more slogans” is appropriate.
Combatants, some states require a contact with a state agencies if state statutes are going to be engaged [in the federal complaint]. If this proposed legal battle concerns California I have personal SUCCESSFUL [12e and 12(c)3 requirements] actions with in U. S. District Courts [district nine] and the [Sacramento] state wide claims division.
[email protected]
I’m not sure what Mr. Fincher thinks his latest diatribe has to do with the LP polling possible convention slogans. But, since I’ve had at least one email inquiry over the matter, here’s the story so far:
– Mr. Fincher made a couple of videos incorporating his false allegations that Sean Haugh committed a “crime” by giving people he had no authority over some instructions that they didn’t follow.
– I noted in comments one those videos that Fincher’s allegations were unadulterated bullshit.
– Fincher edited my comments and impersonated me to make it appear that I said things I hadn’t said.
I don’t see this thing ending up in US District Court, for the simple reason that I’d have to establish $80k in damages from Fincher’s libel/defamation for the case to be heard.
That’s difficult in most cases; it would likely be impossible in this one, because I’d have to demonstrate that there are still people who:
a) dispose of that kind of money in areas where I might hope to earn it from them; AND
b) believe a word that comes out of Fincher’s mouth.
That would be a tall order indeed, as Fincher is now pretty well-known as a liar and has publicly admitted to forgery as a petitioner.
So, I shall probably content myself with ensuring that his prospective employers hear from some of their key donors to the effect of “if your organization’s checkbook is open for Fincher, my checkbook is closed for you.”
Thomas Knapp wrote to me: You have until midnight central time tonight to delete your malicious and libelous…content. If the changes aren’t made, I’ll then consider whether I prefer to publicly pants you some more, or just haul your ass into US District Court and show you what the substance of your empty threats looks like when it’s turned on you and made real.
My response: Suing me in U.S. District Court (monopoly gov’t forum)?
Cool, Knapp! I’ll even HELP you.
My full name is Gary Lynn Fincher, and my date of birth is 11/30/61. I work as a free lance political consultant and my current clients are Marijuana Policy Project of Arizona and the Pima County LP, David Euchner, treasurer. I’ve got a 1998 Saturn SW2 registered in Arkansas, plate no. 637 MIO (this info will be invaluable during the garnishment phase).
You can also add, especially when you “publicly pants” me, that I’m a tax resister, I don’t wear a seat belt, and I sometimes collect signatures on marijuana issues (see above).
Better yet, let ME post this exchange publicly, and hopefully, that’ll accelerate it into litigation (where you’re certain I’ll lose – right?)
Jewish American journalist Philip Weiss offers continuing coverage of the mistreatment of Palestinians living under Israeli jurisdiction: http://mondoweiss.net/
Some will label Weiss a “self-hating Jew”, but blog is informative.
Don’t tread on me…
How original.
Maybe next they’ll take old commercials, and edit the Libertarian Party logo into them.
oh ya…
It will be Legalize Prosperity. Bank on it.
It seems that Gateway to Liberty has now become the runner-up in the poll, next to Don’t Tread on Me.
Steven R Linnabary : plz join the Israel First cabal of the Reform Party of California and join unpatriotic slobs and intra party censors such as John Blare, John Coffey, John Bambey, and Valli Sharpe Giesler. You might feel ‘right at home’!
U S S Liberty
U S S Liberty
U S S Liberty
[when supposedly loyal Americans kill a party media platform to keep a foreign power from being embarrassed over the deaths of U S Navy noncombatants ……….]
Many people, Jake included, buy into the Urban Legend that Israel is some kind of oppressor, and
facts or history be damned, he won’t let that one go.
Yeah, sort of like how those poor slave owners in the south were “oppressing their servants. Why, those people got a free ride over here and guaranteed jobs for life! Those people should have been happy to have no worries, nothing to do but sing and dance down on the plantation!
esalamu alaikum
“How about “Arch Stanton for Liberty”?
Arch supports, half price?
“So why not wait until next year, see how things go with the Obamessiah and pick a timely slogan just about the time the backdrop has to be created?”
“Impeach Obama” is just about guaranteed to be timely.
‘ARCH ENEMY OF TYRANNY’
Arch enemy of 007?
“How about arch-capitalists?”
Wannabe arch-capitalists for sure.
Mr. Witmer,
I think the time you took composing your ridiculously long, cynical and inside-referenced comments could easily have been spent more productively.
“It is a dog-whistle to a certain corporatist conservative religious element that I don’t think the LP wants to be closely tied to.”
Yes they do. Desperately.
“Personally I think that Don’t Tread on Me is used too much. I think that the LP needs to be more original and try something else like Legalize Prosperity.”
Corniest one in the bunch thus most likely to be actually used.
“Carl M. // Aug 20, 2009 at 5:17 pm
How about “Haggling over Nitnoids?”
We have a winner.
jake you sounded like you were on methamphetamine with that long , not entirely lucid tirade.
we dont need to purge anyone. when you talk about infiltrators you sound like a paranoid conspiracy theorist.
How about “Arch Stanton for Liberty”?
Mister Witmer, unfortunately, has confused my and others, policy position on one item with a different policy, of which I do not hold.
While I personally don’t like Eric Dondero, I would like to defend him on this one as well.
Neither he or I, in our (differing) Foreign Policy positions, hold these thoughts out of a desire for profit, but rather out of a desire for the best result for America and our freedom.
Disagree or agree with either of our positions, but we neither believe in ‘war for profit’.
Mister Witmer has an emotional need to demonize us, from the ‘hell has no fury like a Jake scorned’ position.
Likewise, my position on Israel.
I am against foreign aid to any country in principle and in practice and fell both America and Israel would be far better off if aid to the Middle East ended yesterday, if not sooner.
Many people, Jake included, buy into the Urban Legend that Israel is some kind of oppressor, and
facts or history be damned, he won’t let that one go.
That he needs to slip in a (dishonest) dig at me about these matters, in a discussion about LP slogans shows his ADHD inability to focus on the subject at hand.
JAKE! Get over it.
If you want to continue a discussion about Foreign Policy with me, I can go there. Likewise about Israel. Either from a practical, theoretical or Libertarian perspective.
Happy to do it.
But let’s talk about slogans for the LP on this thread. Start a new one if you want to talk about
something different.
I can even do it, since I’m an ‘official’ IPR writer, who has chosen to let others do the heavy lifting of writing articles for now.
JT, the problem is that the term “prosperity” has been absolutely taken over by the preachers of the Prosperity Gospel, a religious movement. Do a poll of Americans and ask them which public figure they most closely associate with the term prosperity, and I guarantee you they’ll pick Joel Osteen. The word itself is appropriate for libertarian philosophy, but as a slogan it’s now liable to be misinterpreted by people who’ve heard of the Prosperity Gospel and assume the LP stands for that religious movement.
So when is the deadline for the idea of the slogan?
Why not “Who is Sam Konkin?” or “Let the Good Times Roll.”???
Seriously, the only reason we need a slogan is for the backdrop to the C-Span tv coverage (we are going to get it yes?). So it has to be short, sweet and- most of all – appeal to interested viewers who aren’t necessarily true believer libertarians. So why not wait until next year, see how things go with the Obamessiah and pick a timely slogan just about the time the backdrop has to be created?
good one
or ‘ARCH ENEMY OF TYRANNY’
legalize prosperity seems to only appeal to the capitalist side of the LP . im not too fond of any of them,but since stloius arch is called the gateway arch , i think 1 of the 2 using arch would be appropriate
Jeremy: “It is a dog-whistle to a certain corporatist conservative religious element that I don’t think the LP wants to be closely tied to.”
Prosperity implies corporatist, conservative, and religious? Where are you from? On a micro level, every individual should care about being able to keep the fruits of their own work and not have them seized. On a macro level, everyone should care about having a growing, job-producing economy.
I don’t think that’s a good slogan though because I think “prosperity” is too big a word for a slogan. A good slogan is short, simple, and catchy.
Laissez faire les bon temps rouler!
It’s not that it sounds dorky. It is a dog-whistle to a certain corporatist conservative religious element that I don’t think the LP wants to be closely tied to.
Legalize Prosperity may sound dorky, but it’s second place in the poll.
BTW, Jake – you’ll be pleased to know that a video is in the works to cover Kohlhaas and his great embezzlement & cover-up of 2006-2007 (Nebraska).
Stay tuned.
Peter….Oh…never mind…
I misunderstood you…I see now what you’re referring to…apologies.
Peter, that link worked for me when I just tried it. I’m not sure where the problem lies on your end. The link should go to a Part 2 of my first video (now called Part 1).
I’ve seen that soy sauce video, but it has nothing to do with me.
Here’s the link again for ya: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsNFUYEVTEg
“Legalize Prosperity” is a terrible slogan, unless the LP wants to become the Joel Osteen Party. Clearly the LP is not just a party for rich people, as that slogan would imply.
Ahh. It’s gettin’ late my friend. Nonetheless, I don’t really think the sock monkey (Haugh) is the problem, but rather the hand inside the sock monkey (Kohlhaas et al.).
Then again, G. Edward Griffin has perhaps made me too aware of the conspiratorial view of reality. If only the world could go back to being as simple as it was when it was only “Those who agree with ‘For a New Liberty'” vs. “Those who disagree with ‘For a New Liberty'”
I don’t like factoring in “Those who pretend to agree with ‘For a New Liberty'” into the equation. They mess it all up. It’s no longer a neat ledger of “+” vs. “-“.
LOL
Hey Jake – I hear what you’re saying about Sean Haugh.
Here’s my newest saying about him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsNFUYEVTEg
…Oh wait, I forgot to describe a graphic design in my previous slogan recommendations made on a site that can’t recommend slogans. So, here it is:
“An eagle, holding an atomic bomb, swooping down over an aerial view of Washington DC, at night.”
also good would be
“a howler monkey standing in line at the DMV, smoking a heaping bowl of weed, with the Missouri flag waving in the background” (If we use this one, we have to make sure “DMV” by “Primus” is being played in the background when we’re interviewed on CNN.)
Oh wait, maybe describing graphic designs that won’t be adopted is as asinine as suggesting slogans that won’t be adopted, with both things being as asinine as suggesting anything to people who have no intention of listening to anything we say, and no intention of promoting individual freedom in any way.
(…We could also use that famous cartoon of the frog strangling the crane that’s trying to swallow him, with the slogan “Never Submit!”)
LOL
How about” Losertarians for Liberty”?
“Challenge the cult of the omnipotent group of people who use the word cult in their slogan and thereby forever associate themselves with it in the subconscious minds of the unphilosophical graduates of the government youth propaganda camps.”
I know it’s kind of circular, but you have to admit, it’s catchy.
“Haggling over nitnoids” +1
“Nattering over Naybobs” +1
Additional similar choices: “Smoke-Filled Back Room Deals, Now Half Price!”, “Rejoice: Another Political Party”, “Hipster Jobs For All (…Of The Well-Connected)!”, “The Official People’s Front of Judea” or, conversely, “The Official Judean People’s Front”. In an effort to further obscure the concept of radical freedom, we could use: “Who is SEK3?” (That would really confuse anyone who was a mammal from North America.)
Instead of “Show Me Freedom” we could also use “Show Me Uranus” (The LP would have to rehire Sean Haugh if they really wanted that to be applicable, though.)
Sadly, even for those willing to take the slogan search seriously, reader feedback wasn’t really encouraged, because people couldn’t suggest their own slogans (and vote on them). Why not? It would have been easy to program/put up. (It would have been easy to allow this. Simply allow people to suggest a slogan via an automated form, then allow one vote per IP address up or down for ALL slogans. Gradually, (after well over 1,000 votes) the best information/feedback would begin to emerge. It would be fun to see which ones of the originals wound up in the top 10, and what they were supplanted with. (–What are we payin’ the slogan team for??!!– ) Feedback based on a narrow set of limited choices is weak feedback. The LP is supposed to be full of people smart enough to prefer strong, decentralized feedback techniques.
This decentralist approach encourages less back patting and ego-stroking of the annointed “LP slogan team” behind closed doors when one of their weak “solutions” is chosen. Unfortunately, it also encourages the general membership of the libertarian party to “get involved”. It’s hard to say which is worse, since the general membership of the Libertarian Party typically is really proud of the fact that they’ve read “For a New Liberty” and completely unaware of any and all books on (or approaches to) political STATEGY. (ie: They have no idea what the man on the street is thinking. If they did, they might consider the slogan “Real Change.” because “Change” was what the Dems came up with, for both Clinton and Obama, and it worked both times. I also like “Demand More Freedom!” but the wisdom of unhindered voluntary choice of the voluntaryist group might actually come up with more wisdom than I would on my own. After all, the group is going to vote up what resonates with them, and even if that’s stupid, it might be a smarter choice than what we’d come up with on our own –since we want unphilosophical and uninformed people to vote for our candidates.
—Except for those infiltrating, who want the opposite. Which brings up an interesting point: how do we prevent the worst choice from always being picked if we are infiltrated? (This almost makes online elections and decentralization more welcome, since it’s “harder to game the results”.)
As a remedy to infiltration, I can only encourage the morally and structurally bankrupt AZ LP leadership to commit mass suicide a la the “Heaven’s Gate” cult, and actual libertarians in the rest of the LP to move to Wyoming to consolidate their limited intellectual and activist resources in a desperate (yet realistic) attempt to make anarchozionism finally work. This might make the National LP irrelevant, but I’d settle for unambiguously controlling one state (even the one with the lowest population). Of course, rather than give the other 49 states any control over the WY LP, it would probably be best to start a new party, even if that is a sub-optimal strategy, since it wouldn’t allow other states an easy “ready made” way to imitate our success. Then again, it wouldn’t allow them to infiltrate us, either.
Beyond that, if the current LP wanted success, it could stop the McCarthyist witch-hunt against its own petitioners from former employee Sean Haugh, and the latest ledge on the crumbling structure he’s jumped onto, “the Free and Equal Election Coalition”. …That would be nice.
I also look forward to seeing what methods the LP will install to make sure no actual libertarians infiltrate the leadership of the Party at the next convention. …That should be interesting. (Or the reverse of that, if the LP is not totally lost.)
I’d actually like Sean Haugh’s input on this one. Perhaps we could convince him we still wanted his advice, and get him to actually underestimate our intelligence. (Previously, his low estimates have been correct, but if he told us to use “Legalize Human Slavery” probably 2/3 of the Libertarian Party would be smart enough to see that either he or his “dotted-line-boss”, Scott Kohlhaas, actually weren’t taking the interests of the LP to heart. The remaining 1/3 of the Party could be given free copies of “Winning Elections” and sent to a compulsory “remedial electoral politics 101” class.)
Long story shart, until the National LP undergoes an infltrator purge, the party line (or convention slogan) is likely to be less professional than “Fuck Obama”, and probably less successful at portraying us as anything other than a bunch of out-of-touch Repuglican-lite wingnuts.
In that light, we might as well be allowed to have fun with the slogan, so I suggest:
“Down With Big Brother” (“Down with Scrawny Brother”?) or the more staid “Freedom of Choice” (the latter an attempt to rid ourselves of the stink associated with Statist state prosecutors and their Pro-Zygote Political Pragmatist Perotista Preacher campaign managers).
We may just want to lower the Barr completely, and go with “Now Half Price” or “Everything Must Go!” (next to a mushroom cloud), just so we don’t hand the infiltrators too much. Moreover, it’s our own tax money that’s paying them, and we don’t want to break the bank. Freedom Force actually has a “creed of freedom” that’s probably a little less likely to result in infiltration, and at least there, there’s the expectation that one will have read “The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve” prior to running for office.
That would at least eliminate the truly demented “war-for-profit” crowd (Bruce Cohen, and “Master Shake” Dondero) from the LP. Unless they’re good enough actors to read “Lead into Gold” and still use shrill ad-hominem epithets like “un-American” and “anti-semite” to describe those who don’t view Israel as the 51st State. (According to BC, I’m an “anti-semite” because I “refused to admit” to him that “Israel is always right in its conflict with Palestine.”)
Maybe instead of “Don’t Tread On Me” we could use the more visual “Den of Vipers”. That might scare activists from the Ron Paul movement away, thus preventing them from becoming victims of force or fraud, as they most certainly would become if they were to join the LP. In all, it’s hard for me to remain objective in this little contest, so –like most libertarian activists– I think I’ll sit on the sidelines and bide my time, hoping that the LP cleans house.
Time will tell.
“Challenge the cult of the omnipotent state”
“Subvert the Dominant Paradigm” is not an option?
Lame … (j/k) 😉
I think “Peace & Prosperity” is a good three-worder
Like it, Only you can change, who do we send this other idea to so they can let people know.
These slogans are very weak. Very weak. I have suggested numerious times:
ONLY YOU CAN CHANGE THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM: STOP THE ADDICTION!
Then you can add or not as you choose:
Vote libertarian
Vote whomever the candidate is
or add: You can’t vote and expect different results, what have you got to lose except less of the same.
This slogan says it all and right to the point.
“Third Party Revolution // Aug 20, 2009 at 8:52 pm
Personally I think that Don’t Tread on Me is used too much. I think that the LP needs to be more original and try something else like Legalize Prosperity.”
Legalize Prosperity sounds dorky.
“Don’t Tread On Me” is great, BUT, it is already in use by most Libertarians, as well as R’s and others… This makes it too common…if you are looking for a slogan that will be at all unique go for something else.
Gateway to Liberty…Simple, to the point, easy to understand in a general “big picture” way, plus the location of the convention is given a reference…I like that one….
Of course, if the LP fails to correct –on paper– the blacklisting of its best, most ideological and skilled workers, and also fails to develop a system of conflict resolution, our slogan could be:
“We Want Power, Too”
Maybe just “Liberty and Justice”, assuming we could find some candidates who strongly supported jury nullification of law (unlike Bob “anti-drug prosecutor” Barr http://www.conservative.org/columnists/barr/060802bb.asp ) and its accompanying decentralization of power.
Individual Freedom For All
Individual Liberty For All
Liberty and Justice For All
—All of the above are unambiguous and difficult to misinterpret or call “un-American” or hostile. I’m not totally against any of the above choices, I just prefer the ones I’ve listed.
Even “The Anti-Government Choice” would be OK, because then those who consider themselves anti-government would at least be sent a clear message. (A sizeable demographic.) This choice is only bad because it is a negative, rather than a positive, but then again, human psychology also sometimes works that way.
(In my years as a petitioner, I’ve found that most people simultaneously favor specific government handouts, while claiming that they “…generally favor less government and more individual freedom.” In short, most people must be marketed to with generalities that allow them to feel good about their past decisions.)
Zaijian, Comrades,
Jake
Fort Moultrie 1776 LIBERTY flag:
The crescent flag of Colonel William Moultrie’s South Carolina Militia was flying above the defenses on Sullivan Island in Charleston Harbor on June 28, 1776. The British fleet attacked on that day. In the course of the battle, the flag was shot away and fell the outer works. Sergeant William Jasper, defying shot and shell, heroically recovered the banner and, fastening it on a cannon ramrod, implanted it once again on the bastion.
Blue field with palmetto tree and block capital LIBERTY
Personally I think that Don’t Tread on Me is used too much. I think that the LP needs to be more original and try something else like Legalize Prosperity.
““Don’t Tread on Me”
“Gateway to Freedom”
“Gateway to Liberty”
“Legalize Prosperity”
“Show Me Freedom”
None of the above”
Out of these choices I think that Don’t Tread on Me is the coolest.
The convention could be adorned with Gadsen flags.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsden_flag
This could be the convention’s theme song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Db1s-eV-Bd0
“2010: Judgment Day”
Gateway to smack’d be cool. Just kidding.
The word “peace” has just ggot to appear in the slogan.
I am not a Libertarian…
But…
I think the “Gateway to Liberty” one is good. I think that a lot of people don’t know what Libertarian means. And, saying, “Liberty” makes it simple and easy to remember.
How about “Haggling over Nitnoids?”