Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« ELFs and ALFs strike again | Main | Libertarian Party leader will challenge Stephen Harper in Calgary Southwest »

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Bob Barr campaign cries foul over Texas Secretary of State "finding" the nomination papers

Yesterday, I posted about Bob Barr being the only presidential candidate officially on the ballot in Texas. Today, Shane Cory, Deputy Campaign Manager for the Barr campaign, sent the following email:

"As it stands now, Bob Barr is the Lone Candidate in the Lone Star State.

As the filing deadline passed this week, Bob Barr was the only presidential candidate legally certified on the ballot in Texas.

The new Texas law is clear:

A political party is entitled to have the names of its nominees for president and vice-president of the United States placed on the ballot in a presidential general election if . . . before 5 p.m. of the 70th day before presidential election day, the party's state chair signs and delivers to the secretary of state a written certification of the names of the party's nominees for president and vice-president . . .

Given that the deadline passed on Tuesday, Senator Obama was nominated on Wednesday, and Senator McCain has not even announced his selection for Vice President, the Republican and Democrat parties in Texas were technically unable to certify their candidates by the deadline.

However, I have a sneaking suspicion that the ballot situation in Texas will magically correct itself.

Since we sent out our release yesterday regarding Bob being the only presidential candidate certified in Texas, a spokeswoman for the Texas Secretary of State's office stated that, "Upon further checking, both parties filed before the deadline.  We expect their amended filings after both parties finish their nominating process at the conventions."

Upon further checking . . .

Hmmm . . .

As it turns out, upon further checking , we were able to collect 10,000 more signatures in West Virginia a few days after that early deadline passed.

Upon further checking, we found that ballot substitution is permitted in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.

Also, upon further checking, we found that Maine stopped accepting our petitions a week earlier than they had done in the past. 

Not to mention that, upon further checking, we do object to the state of New Hampshire insisting that two libertarian candidates for president be listed on the ballot.

Finally, upon further checking, we found that the signature thresholds in Oklahoma are a bit too high.

Will our diligence pay off for us in West Virginia, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Maine and Oklahoma where we have active interests?

Do you think that John McCain and Barack Obama's names will eventually be printed on the ballot in Texas?

I would be willing to make an educated guess and say that we're going to have to fight our hearts out to get on the ballot in the states above while the Republican and Democrat candidates won't have to lift a finger to secure their place on the Texas ballot.

. . . that is unless we make a stand in Texas.

And that's exactly what we're going to do.

This situation in Texas is a perfect opportunity to highlight the double standard that exists in our nation. 

Over the past several decades, Libertarians have spent millions of dollars, filed countless numbers of lawsuits while being sued countless numbers of times over their right to be on the ballot.  Thousands of people have put in their time, energy, earnings and passion in an effort that, in the end, simply allows a voter to see a candidate's name printed on the ballot.

Throughout every battle that we engage in each election season, we must dot every "I" and cross every "T" or face the consequences of failure for our ballot drives.

Even when we follow the letter of the law, as we did in Pennsylvania, we still face challenges that drain our financial resources and strain our staff. 

Should we give Barack Obama and John McCain a pass in Texas and look the other way?  Would they do that for us?

. . . I don't think so.

If John McCain and Barack Obama want to bend the rules to get on the ballot in Texas, they're going to do it with the Barr Campaign and tens of thousands supporters looking on and scrutinizing their every move."

Posted by P.M. Jaworski on August 28, 2008 in International Politics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e200e554b3d8688834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bob Barr campaign cries foul over Texas Secretary of State "finding" the nomination papers:

Comments

Should be simple enough to do a FOIA request to get the envelope and filings. Check the stamped receive date against the requirement...

And wonder how McCain will get his VP candidate listed.

Posted by: Mike | 2008-08-28 2:45:35 PM


I love it!!!!

I can't stand the 2 party system. Countless others just like me cant either. Why do you think that given a population of > 300 million a relatively small number of folks even bother to vote.

Posted by: Jimster | 2008-08-28 3:06:58 PM


Like anyone gives a shit over this moronic and irrelevant Bob whoguy.

Posted by: epsilon | 2008-08-28 3:07:52 PM


Hm, Epsi, let's see here. Just now, we are in the midst of four- to five-times our regular traffic. The end of the day will be record breaking, in terms of traffic. And which posts are causing all this traffic? The Bob Barr post, and the Ron Paul post.

Who gives a shit? Apparently, just about everybody. Except for you.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-28 3:13:47 PM


The man may have just won Texas and you call him irrelevant?

Posted by: Andrew P | 2008-08-28 3:15:54 PM


Did you know that "epsilon" is an anagram for "nose lip", "'ol penis", "lopes in", "piles on" and "Pine Sol"?

Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-08-28 3:32:57 PM


I attest that I did not, Fact Check. Very informative.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-28 3:38:15 PM


Doesn't Texas law require both vp and pres to be on the nom papers? If so whats going on?

Posted by: tk | 2008-08-28 3:40:21 PM


But it would surely not be reasonable for a state to prevent its citizens from voting for the candidate of their choice, i.e. with an overwhelming majority either Obama or McCain.

So the overall "constitutional" intent of the law should, in my opinion, clearly outweigh the letter of the law. (Providing, of course, that there is a problem in the first place.)

Posted by: Johan i Kanada | 2008-08-28 3:43:33 PM


And as for Moronic I think that word should be reserved for the Democratic and Republican Texas State Chairmen, if they did forget to file in time.

Posted by: Steve | 2008-08-28 3:43:54 PM


If we had learned to spell, we could just write in which ever person. Ballots might be counted right then.

Posted by: Lil Tx | 2008-08-28 4:06:35 PM


Doesn't Texas law require both vp and pres to be on the nom papers? If so whats going on?
Posted by: tk | 28-Aug-08 3:40:21 PM

I'll let you in on a secret, but don't tell anyone you heard it from me. It's the work of the Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, and World Trade Organization with help from Royal Institute for International Affairs,Council on Foreign Relations and Wal-Mart. Now you don't fuck with those people.

Posted by: The Stig | 2008-08-28 4:29:04 PM


Stig your hilarious.
Let corruption prevail...we're used to it anyway.

Posted by: JC | 2008-08-28 5:51:34 PM


Jaws, your increased traffic is a result of all the Llibertarian dronebots that land like flies on stink whenever a Bobfuck post goes up anywhere in the world.

Yours is nothing but a craven attempt to inflate circulation numbers just like the Glob and Mail counts the thousands of papars dumped on hotel rooms as part of its official circulation.

So, how many weeks of working capital do you guys have left anyway?

Epsi

Posted by: epsilon | 2008-08-28 11:18:38 PM


Keep waiting patiently, Epsi, for our capital to run out. Keep waiting. And waiting. And waiting.

Since you don't know anything about what counts as "success" for a website, I'll break it down for you: You get hits, you're a success. You don't, you're a failure. The end.

But, please, enlighten me as to what you think our strategy should be. How can we make you happy? What would you like us to post on? How would you like us to run the Western Standard?

(And yesterday was a record-breaking day in terms of traffic--but only by a hundred or so--while today shattered our daily average by a bit more than four-fold. I'll keep on reporting on the liberty movement, since many are interested, but can't turn to the Globe or the National Post for coverage).

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-28 11:25:13 PM


Sorry. Hits are irrelevant. What counts are dollars. And since you did not mention dollars I can only assume you have none.

Posted by: epsilon | 2008-08-28 11:33:57 PM


Okay, epsi. Proof is in the pudding. So, like I said, keep waiting. We have enough dollars to run this site for at least another two years, and we have new money coming in. Hits attract money.

Shouldn't you be busy voting for some pop star or something anyways? Focus on what really matters, epsi! Which you've decided is determined by popularity.

Posted by: P.M. Jaworski | 2008-08-28 11:39:56 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.