Tonight's Libertarian Convention Will Prove a Travesty

Discussion
1

I think what happened tonight at the convention will go down as the worst
thing that has ever happened to the Libertarian Party, worse even than the
Howard Stern and Warren Redlich debacles.

What happened is Republican Party Operative and notorious dirty trickster
Roger Stone showed up with 40 non-Libertarians who had just joined the
party within the last few days.

The by-laws were passed when Howard Stern did that decades ago to prevent
this from happening again. These by-laws were ignored.

That would not have been a problem as Kristin Davis apparently had enough
votes to win even without the Roger Stone people, but then suddenly and
unexpectedly Kristin Davis withdrew as a candidate in favor of
non-Libertarian Joe
Lhota<http://capweb1.alleyinteractive.com/article/politics/2012/12/6934222/what-we-dont-know-about-joe-lhota>who
is one of seven candidates seeking the Republican Party nomination for
mayor of New York City. Joe Lhota's principal qualification is that he was
MTA Chief under Rudy Guiliani.

When Blay Tarnoff who is the author of many of the LPNY bylaws objected he
was shouted down by the Roger Stone people.

Finally, the Chairman John Clifton ruled that everybody who wanted to vote
had to identify themselves. Then armed with lists of members of the various
chapters of the Libertarian Party, Blay Tarnoff started asking the Roger
Stone people to identify themselves so it could be determined whether they
were members of the Libertarian Party or not.

When he did that, the Roger Stone people started screaming that he had no
right to ask them their names. "How dare you ask me my name", " You have no
right to know that."

The meeting descended to chaos with almost everybody yelling and screaming,
including Randy Credico who suddenly decided he wanted to run for mayor
after having previously declared that he was not a candidate.

Then the Roger Stone people made a motion to overturn the ruling of the
chair that all those voting had to identify themselves. The motion passed
as all those who had refused to reveal their names voted in favor of this
motion.

Thus, Joe Lhota<http://capweb1.alleyinteractive.com/article/politics/2012/12/6934222/what-we-dont-know-about-joe-lhota>who
had not attended the meeting so we do not know what his positions got
the nomination with the 41 Roger Stone people all voting for Joe Lhota and
almost all of the Libertarian Party regular members voting for None of the
Above. As there were only about 20 Libertarian Party regulars at the
convention, Joe
Lhota<http://capweb1.alleyinteractive.com/article/politics/2012/12/6934222/what-we-dont-know-about-joe-lhota>barely
got a 2/3rds majority.

Finally, a young woman declared she was running for public advocate. She
identified herself as a "Union Member" and a Green Party Candidate. Almost
all of her positions were exactly the opposite from Libertarian Party
positions.

Nevertheless, the 41 Roger Stone votes were enough to give her the
nomination.

The convention ended with Blay Tarnoff mulling whether he should ask the
State Committee to nullify the results of the convention on the grounds of
by-law violations and the fact that people were allowed to vote who refused
to give their names.

It remains to be seen if Joe
Lhota<http://capweb1.alleyinteractive.com/article/politics/2012/12/6934222/what-we-dont-know-about-joe-lhota>will
accept the Libertarian Party nomination. I predict that he will do
what William Weld did, which is decline our nomination if he does not get
the Republican Party nomination.

Sam Sloan

2

If you can't runn your own party, what can you run?

3

Ha!! My point for the last 10 years!

Marcy

4

It's an object lesson in the necessity of forming a new league.

5

Or perhaps an object lesson in the necessity of having a stronger minimum ideological threshold that people have to meet before they are allowed to vote on Libertarian Party policy, candidate endorsements, bylaws, etc. Of course any rules put in place are only as strong as the willingness to uphold them (and this would be as true in a new organization as in an existing one).

  Ultimately what we need is a party culture that is strongly committed to radical libertarianism and highly resistant to seductive visions of "winning" (to the extent a Libertarian candidate does not believe in libertarianism or act to advance a pro-freedom agenda, an election "win" is in fact a loss), "being taken seriously", etc., so that people like Roger Stone won't be able to show up and find fertile ground for their schemes. Tougher ideological safeguards, while not a silver bullet, should have the effect of helping us create such a culture.

  Nullifying the results of convention votes after the fact is a pretty extreme measure not to be undertaken lightly, but in this case it sounds like it might be justified. Thanks for spreading the word Sam, and good luck getting this mess fixed.

Love & Liberty,
                               ((( starchild )))

6

There will be a telephone conference call this evening of the State
Committee of the New York Libertarian party on a motion by Blay Tarnoff to
overturn the results of the April 9 convention and hold a new convention.

This motion will certainly pass as indeed it should because the April 9
convention was dominated by a raucous group of non-Libertarians who refused
even to identify themselves or state their names.

At least 12 members of the state committee have said that they will vote
for the motion, enough to pass.

However, it presents a legal question of under what circumstances can the
results of a convention be overturned and declared null-and-void.

I am suggesting that Starchild listen in on this telephone conference call
as he is our representative on the National Committee and he has expressed
interest in this topic.

If he wants to listen in he may call me and I will give him the password.

Sam Sloan

7

There will be a telephone conference call this evening May 5, 2013 of the
State Committee of the New York Libertarian party on a motion by Blay
Tarnoff to overturn the results of the April 9 convention and hold a new
convention.

This motion will certainly pass as indeed it should because the April 9
convention was dominated by a raucous group of non-Libertarians who refused
even to identify themselves or state their names.

At least 12 members of the state committee have said that they will vote
for the motion, enough to pass.

However, it presents a legal question of under what circumstances can the
results of a convention be overturned and declared null-and-void.

I am suggesting that Starchild listen in on this telephone conference call
as he is our representative on the National Committee and he has expressed
interest in this topic.

If he wants to listen in he may call me and I will give him the password.

8

Hi Sam,

  I think maybe you are confusing me with Dan Wiener or Brett Pojunis, the regional reps for the region that includes New York? However if the call hasn't taken place yet and you get this message in a timely fashion, I would be interested to call in and listen if I'm not busy at that time. It does sound like a sensitive topic where it could be helpful to have people witness and speak up if they have any concerns about proper procedure, so nothing comes back to haunt you later. I think I have your number, and if I do, will give you a ring.

Love & Liberty,
                                ((( starchild )))

9

No. I was addressing the SF Group when I wrote that Starchild is our man on
the National Committee.

Anyway, the meeting is over and the motion passed.

The results of the April 9 "convention" have been nullified. A new
convention will be held organized by Blay Tanoff. The vote was about 12 to
1. The only no vote was Janet Hogh who said we should avoid lawsuits and so
it would be better to have no Libertarian Party Candidate for Mayor of the
City of New York. I am sorry that Starchild wrote too late to inquire. It
was a very spirited and interesting debate.

Sam Sloan

10

Sam,
You have left Novato?
John

11

I am in San Rafael, not Novato.

Sam Sloan