On the matter of the AIP website…

Some of you TPW bloggers, Constitutionalists, and others who are paying attention to the situation in California are wondering what’s going on with the AIP website.

In a email from AIP member, Mike Triggs, this pretty much sums it up:

“It appears that the Noonan gang has registered a new domain, www.aip-ca.com
When you enter the “old” URL- www.aipca.org -you are immediately redirected to the Noonan web site.
Noonan’s new domain appears to be constructed by the Keyes people…big news there.”

Yes, supposedly the AIP website was retrieved by the legally elected AIP officers, (at the Los Angeles Convention), but apparently the Noonan people knew how bypass the security settings and hacked into the website.

Unfortunately, the AIP website currently is the mouthpiece for the Ed Noonan people, temporary, therefore it is unrealible as the Party’s official website, for now.

33 Responses to “On the matter of the AIP website…”

  1. Stefan Says:

    Unbelievable. Perhaps the AIP should change its name and you register a new domain for that? In the meantime, maybe you can register a new domain, if available, like www.aip-ca.org (instead of aipca.org) etc?

  2. Open Letter From Don Lake Says:

    The reform movement malady!

  3. Stefan Says:

    They have registered aip-ca.com yesterday and today aip-ca.org Unbelievable!
    Get (register) aipca.us… they got aip-ca.us already..

  4. Richard Winger Says:

    This is good reporting!

  5. John Smith Says:


    American Independent Party of California reiterates its position concerning national affiliation

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

    Media contact:

    Markham Robinson

    Parliamentarian

    American Independent Party of California

    [email protected]

    Marysville CA - June 30, 2008

    In the wake of a small weekend meeting of members, non-members, and out of state interlopers, the duly-elected and legally-constituted officers and State Central Committee members of California ’s American Independent Party, including Chairman Edward C. Noonan and Vice-Chairman Mark Seidenberg, today clarified the official position of the party.

    On Saturday, the party announced its affiliation nationally with the newly-formed America ’s Independent Party of Fenton, MI. The American Independent Party had previously affiliated on a national basis with the Constitution Party of Lancaster, PA.

    The State Central Committee of the American Independent Party voted unanimously in its Friday meeting to make the switch, after which the new 2008 national affiliation was duly filed with the Secretary of State’s office in accordance with the requirements of California ’s Election Code.

    State Vice Chairman Mark Seidenberg, commenting on the activities of the rogue group, which is falsely claiming to represent the AIP, said, “Edward C. Noonan, our Chairman, was elected to a two-year term, which doesn’t expire until September. The group which met in Los Angeles has no legal standing or right to present themselves as in any way representing the American Independent Party. Any actions they took or will take under the direction of out-of-state political operatives are null and void.””

    so is the last part of this not true?

  6. Bill Lussenheide Says:

    The website situation is soon to be under control, in spite of the unlawful and unethical attempts to hijack the site. Ed Noonan, nor any of the very small group of people who seek disaffiliaton are the legal owners, nor legal registrants of the website. Their actions are unconscionable and without merit. The duly authorized American Independent Party, which remains fully affiliated with the Constitution Party, demands the immediate cease and desist of this website tampering activity and are fully prepared to seek full redress and remedy to do so.

    STATEMENT FROM NEW CHAIRMAN OF THE AIP- JIM KING

    I am proud to introduce myself to you as the new legally elected Chairman of this great party called the American Independent Party. The over forty years of efforts to retain our Constitutional rights has historically been our primary motive for existence. These rights are currently under siege by principalities who do not represent the Judeo Christian values passed on to us by the founders of this great nation. I promise that I will continue to do everything I can to protect this on going effort. It will be a great honour to serve.

    I am here to serve you the party and not to be served. Our endeavors if they are successful will require the help of as many members of our party as possible. My responsibility will be to see we are successfully focused to win elections and fly higher than we ever have at faster speeds that have never been achieved. In that regard we have a Presidential Candidate Mr. Chuck Baldwin, a righteous man of extreme talent and capabilities that has the integrity, brains, strength and fortitude to indeed be elected the next President of the United States. Our party will focus to do everything we can to succeed to help Chuck Baldwin in this endeavor.

    We will continue to be affiliated with the Constitution Party nationally. Since 1992 we have had this affiliation with the Constitution Party. The Constitution Party reflects the values and the platform of our party. Our party platform will be adhered to completely and be closely endeared by this Chairman. I invite all those who wish to protect our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to participate in this party.

    My election as your chairman at our meeting in Los Angeles, California on June 29, 2008 has been done legally under the election codes and bylaws of our party. Any other small group of unlegal attempts currently under way to pirate away our party have no legal validity and I ask the members of our party and the public to not participate in their folly. Let no one attempt to rob this great outlet for freedom away from the citizens of the great State of California

    God Bless and protect our party as we endeavor to protect our freedoms.

    Jim King/Chairman/American Independent Party

  7. Cody Quirk Says:

    so is the last part of this not true?

    = Exactely!

    The TRUTH is Jim King is the new Chairman and the AIP is still with the CP!

  8. Cody Quirk Says:

    Richard, from now on, you have my full authorization to repost my articles on Ballot Access News. In fact feel free to report on this!

  9. Deran Says:

    When googling “America’s Independent Party” (a rather clunky name; but how many ways can you combine American and Independent) it seems to suddenly have websites for several state branches.

    Is this an entirely Alan Keyes’ for President vehicle, or does A’sIP have a life of it’s own?

    When I go to what seems to be Mr. Keyes current campaign site, there is no mention at all of this new A’sIP?

    http://www.americasrevival.com/

  10. Bill Lussenheide Says:

    Peruse Alan Keyes americasrevival.com/ site and click on the ballot access forum.

    There is only ballot access in for Keyes in one state… Colorado. One of the easiest states in the Union to get on, requiring only a $750 filing fee.

    Very little activity there, and little to cheer about in terms of ballot access or future potential for the Keyes camp.

    The so called “America’s Independent Party” (different from the true AIP-Calif, which is still affiliated with the Constitution Party) still does not even have it’s website functional and continues to say (as it has for months) “under construction” even at this late date before the election.

    For those few in California that are seeking alignment with such, it must be stated to be the ultimate gesture of futility and desperation that this political observer has ever witnessed.

  11. End the Empire Says:

    As stated elsewhere Keyes’ CULT may “catch” the mothership at anytime. Lock it down in LAW with the Sec.of State and get on about the business of the campaign for BaldWIN/Castle…

  12. Michael Seebeck Says:

    Geez, and I thought the LP had issues…

  13. Tim Says:

    “...supposedly the AIP website was taken over by the legally elected AIP officers, (at the Los Angeles Convention), but apparently the Noonan people knew how bypass the security settings and hacked into the website.”

    What evidence do you have of this? Did the “new” AIP leadership ever have control of the website to begin with?

    If all Noonan did was log in and change his password, this could hardly be considered “hacking.”

  14. Bill Lussenheide Says:

    The website and website domain is owned by an officer at the Los Angeles Convention who is 100% in line with Jim King and the Constitution Party affiliation.

  15. Tim Says:

    Would this be Charles Deemer? Only he and the AIP-CA itself are listed as official administrators of the domain.

    You still haven’t shown whether “hacking” or “bypassing security settings” was involved.

  16. Red Phillips Says:

    I think the name America’s Independent Party (note the possessive) was chosen specifically so it would have the AIP initials. Was this hijack planned from the start? If Keyes is appearing by streaming video at their rump Convention, then he will be tarred with this mess even more than he already is.

  17. enrique Says:

    I am completely outside the party but why does Noonan have no power? It seems as if he was chair and had a central committee.

    Is this a clash of party rules versus state laws?

  18. Cody Quirk Says:

    I am completely outside the party but why does Noonan have no power?

    = Because he was voted out of office by the State Committee and the LA Convention.

    You still haven’t shown whether “hacking” or “bypassing security settings” was involved.

    = The website itself is proof.

    Suposedly they got past the security codes and altered it without permission.

  19. Tim Says:

    That answers nothing. “Gotten past the security codes.” What does that even mean?

    Chances are, someone from Noonan’s group had authorized access to the site, and they merely changed it up. If that’s hacking, then I’m a regular Kevin Mitnick.

    The fact is, Bill Lussenheide, you, and others here side with Gary Odom’s faction. That’s your business, and, frankly, I have no idea who’s in the right in all this. But I’ve yet to see any compelling proof that Noonan hacked or hijacked anything, including the AIP-CA. He’s simply done things you disagree with.

  20. RRHeustisJr Says:

    I have no idea who’s in the right in all this. But I’ve yet to see any compelling proof that Noonan hacked or hijacked anything, including the AIP-CA. He’s simply done things you disagree with.

    I must agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment.

    There has been a lot of criticism leveled at Mr. Noonan for his actions, but Noonan’s Elections Code rationale has not been refuted on this forum once. Instead, there has been nothing but ad hominem argumentation against Mr. Noonan, and even a refusal of others to debate the actual merits on this forum.

    My gut feeling is that Mr. Noonan is being very crafty with the Elections Code to justify his actions, but then again, no counter arguments of any legal nature have been offered in any way, but just a bunch of “we’re-the-party-veterans-since-1968” innuendo, which is anything but substantive.

    As a former member of the AIP/CP, and therefore holding no personal or political interest in the outcome of this imbroglio, I am very interested to learn what the legal and political ramifications will be.

    If the California Secretary of State recognizes Noonan’s faction, then in my estimation, only court intervention can prevent Alan Keyes from being placed on the ballot come November.

    As of today, July 3, 2008, the California Secretary of State officially recognizes Ed Noonan of Marysville, California as the State Chair of the AIP. Even the California Secretary of State website publicly lists Noonan, his home address, and his faction’s internet web address:

    http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_f.htm

    It appears as if court intervention is necessary to alter this official state recognition, and Noonan will not be the one required to file.

  21. Cody Quirk Says:

    The SOS has this notice on the webpage:

    ‘As of January 2008’

    The old AIP website is listed, so the SOS obviously hasn’t updated the info.

    There are several things that Ed is doing that are not in conformity with the Elections codes and the bylaws,

    For one Ed claims the Convention must be held in Sacramento. Ed is wrong on that.

    ELECTIONS CODE
    SECTION 7570

    “7570. The state convention shall meet biennially, at a location
    designated by the state central committee, at 10 a.m. on a Saturday
    following the direct primary election, but in no event later than
    August 15.”

    Ed claimed to have a ‘online’ meeting on Friday with certain members of the State Central Committee, however…

    “7620. The committee shall convene in the same community where the
    state convention is held, at 10 a.m. on the Sunday following the
    state convention.”

    Even if the AIP in the past didn’t do that. Ed is no different.

    Another thing..

    “7639. The state central committee or its executive committee shall
    designate by resolution or bylaw the national committee or party
    organization with which the American Independent Party is affiliated
    and shall file a copy of the resolution or bylaw with the Secretary
    of State. In the event of controversy over the national affiliation
    of the party, the most recent resolution or bylaw filed shall be
    determinative.”

    Of course Jim King and the others already filed the paperwork with the SoS after last weekend’s Convention, so Ed’s dissaffiliation from the CP from Friday is a bit invalid.

    But again, Ed claiming that the CP never elected anyone to office has to be one of the most Stupidest things I have ever heard from a AIP member.

    But one thing you are right on, Ed is being crafty with the Election Codes indeed. Perhaps he should become a ACLU lawyer.

  22. Cody Quirk Says:

    And the website isn’t legally owned by, or belongs to him, nor Mark Seidenburg or Markham Robinson. Yet they’re running it.

  23. Tim Says:

    “The old AIP website is listed, so the SOS obviously hasn’t updated the info.”

    Old website? Do you always change domain names at the convention? /sarcasm

    Noonan, et al, are running the website because they have always had access to the site, and they consider themselves to be the real AIP. They are NOT running it because they hacked into it, as several of your articles have claimed. In fact, I imagine that the new-and-improved AIP people never had access to the website to begin with, so now they’re making a “new” website.

    You are engaging in propaganda for your faction. Fine, but readers should be aware that terms like “legally” and “illegally” are used subjectively here, and terms like “hacking” and “hijacking” are hyperbole meant to turn support from one AIP-CA faction to the other.

    It appears the courts are going to have to tell us who has best conformed to the election laws of the state of California. Sigh How sad that groups formed to change government so often require government to come in and change their diapers.

  24. RRHeustisJr Says:

    Tim wrote:

    [Cody is] engaging in propaganda for [his] faction. Fine, but readers should be aware that terms like “legally” and “illegally” are used subjectively here, and terms like “hacking” and “hijacking” are hyperbole meant to turn support from one AIP-CA faction to the other.

    Precisely. I could not have said it better myself.

    The “argumentation” that has been broadcast on this forum against Mr. Ed Noonan is nothing but character assassination, ad hominem innuendo, and subjective fluff. Nowhere has anybody provided a legal analysis regarding the situation.

    A well-reasoned legal analysis would (1) set forth the issue; (2) cite the law; (3) state the facts; (4) analyze the facts in light of the law; and (5) provide a conclusion.

    Nowhere on this forum has such an analysis been provided.

    However, there has been a statement by an interested national CP officer that such argumentation should not be made on this forum. However, this same officer goes on to assassinate Noonan’s character and engage in innuendo to demonize the opposition and make heroes of “party veterans.”

    If one is unwilling to provide a reasoned legal analysis here, then he should resist the temptation to engage in smears and innuendos.

  25. Cody Quirk Says:

    Noonan, et al, are running the website because they have always had access to the site,

    = Yet they were not authorized to do anything to it, they altered it without authorization. In fact the security passwords were changed to stop them from going in and they still got around it.

    and they consider themselves to be the real AIP.

    = They are not, and the article that came after this shows why.

    They are NOT running it because they hacked into it, as several of your articles have claimed.

    = BS!

    In fact, I imagine that the new-and-improved AIP people never had access to the website to begin with, so now they’re making a “new” website.

    = BS! Are we jumping to conclusions now?

    You are engaging in propaganda for your faction.

    = Nope. Ed is acting AGAINST the California Election Codes. for one,

    “7639. The state central committee or its executive committee shall designate by resolution or bylaw the national committee or party organization with which the American Independent Party is affiliated and shall file a copy of the resolution or bylaw with the Secretary of State. In the event of controversy over the national affiliation of the party, the most recent resolution or bylaw filed shall be determinative.”

    = That means the resolutions made at the Friday meeting Ed and company had are invalid to the State Convention that was held in LA that weekend. And for one, the majority of the Executive Committe of the AIP did not vote for disaffiliation. What Ed is doing is illegal.

    BTW the Officers elected at the LA Convention already filed their paper with the Secretary of State long before the bogus convention this weekend.

    Fine, but readers should be aware that terms like “legally” and “illegally” are used subjectively here, and terms like “hacking” and “hijacking” are hyperbole meant to turn support from one AIP-CA faction to the other.

    = And I presented my case in that one article after this.

    It appears the courts are going to have to tell us who has best conformed to the election laws of the state of California.

    = Not Ed Noonan, for one, he claims he can appoint and remove people at will. NOWHERE in the State Elections Code does it say he can do that!
    Read it!

    One important thing..

    “Sec. 7600: The state central committee shall consist of all of the following persons:
    (a) All delegates to the state convention.
    (b) The chairperson of each county central committee of the party.
    (c) Members appointed pursuant to this part.
    (d) Any person nominated to fill a vacancy in a partisan office in a special election.”

    Ed claimed that only a select few were members of the state commitee because they didn’t run for office. BS!

    Sigh How sad that groups formed to change government so often require government to come in and change their diapers.

    = Sad how you jump to conclusion and don’t know jack about the law and how illegal it is what Ed’s doing.

    Try again, simpleton.

  26. Cody Quirk Says:

    The “argumentation” that has been broadcast on this forum against Mr. Ed Noonan is nothing but character assassination, ad hominem innuendo, and subjective fluff.

    = Yet Mr. Noonan was already doing that to Nancy Shearer and Gary Odom in statements in previous TPW articles here.

    Nowhere has anybody provided a legal analysis regarding the situation.

    = http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/07/04/why-ed-noonan-is-just-plain-wrong-about-the-aip/

    A well-reasoned legal analysis would (1) set forth the issue; (2) cite the law; (3) state the facts; (4) analyze the facts in light of the law; and (5) provide a conclusion.

    Nowhere on this forum has such an analysis been provided.

    = http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/07/04/why-ed-noonan-is-just-plain-wrong-about-the-aip/

    However, there has been a statement by an interested national CP officer that such argumentation should not be made on this forum.

    = Too bad, you don’t run TPW, you have no say, neither does that ‘officer’.

    However, this same officer goes on to assassinate Noonan’s character and engage in innuendo to demonize the opposition and make heroes of “party veterans.”

    = Funny how you engaged in character assasination and demonization of CP members, the CP, and the LDS Church in your article “Have Christ, Will Travel”.

    = Remember Matthew Chapter 7, Reed.

    If one is unwilling to provide a reasoned legal analysis here, then he should resist the temptation to engage in smears and innuendos.

    = http://thirdpartywatch.com/2008/07/04/why-ed-noonan-is-just-plain-wrong-about-the-aip/

    Looks like I don’t have to resist! Yay:P

    BTW, you never resisted yourself either, Mr. Heustis, especially in the comment section of the few of the archived articles on TPW.

  27. RRHeustisJr Says:

    = Funny how you engaged in character assasination (sic) and demonization of CP members, the CP, and the LDS Church in your article “Have Christ, Will Travel”.

    Not one person was named in that article. Therefore, there was neither character assassination nor libel against any particular individual.

    One may disagree wholeheartedly with my perception of certain false religions, which was expressed in the article with the term, “demonic Mormonism,” but to say that these words are akin to personal character assassination or the smearing of a person with unfounded charges against one’s ethics and whatnot, is hyperbole and wishful thinking.

    Criticizing false religion is not the same thing as character assassination, libel or slander. One is an apple, the other is an orange.

    I don’t expect Mr. Quirk to be open to persuasion by my explanation, but people are totally free to make up their own minds by reading the article themselves.

    However, this thread is not about my articles though, so if anybody wishes to contact me personally about this, then please feel free to do so. My email address is listed on the site.

  28. Tim Says:

    “BS!,” says Quirk.

    Is that what passes for reasoned debate on this site? “Somehow got the password” is not necessarily hacking, my friend. You have yet to prove that anyone did anything illegal with the website, and saying “BS” a hundred times will not change that, but will only demonstrate to the TPW community how far your unsubstantiated hopes have exceeded your vocabulary.

    The FACT is, at the time of this posting, you quoted nothing but opinion and hearsay. After much coaxing by Reed Heustis and myself, you finally started quoting bylaws (which Noonan’s faction has done all along), but you have failed to establish the basis for many of the accusations that have been leveled at Noonan since this issue arose. If I were you, I’d be a bit worried that a libel suit could be leveled over some of the writings on this site.

    Ironically, it turns out that I am more sympathetic to the Baldwin faction in this mess, but the behavior and incompetence of you and some of your cohorts has been such that I’m almost persuaded to root for Noonan and the Keyesters, the insignificance of my support notwithstanding.

    Once again I opine that people who vie to change government are so often in need of the nanny state to straighten out their petty messes. How are people supposed to trust the AIP to run their government when they can’t even run their own party?

    Enjoy ruling over the ruins.

  29. RRHeustisJr Says:

    Earlier I commented:
    Nowhere on this forum has such [a legal] analysis been provided.

    To which Mr. Quirk provided the following URL:

    thirdpartywatch.com/2008/07/04/why-ed-noonan-is-just-plain-wrong-about-the-aip/

    Frustratingly, the “research” showcased at the above URL is actually little more than mere cut-and-pastes of the California Elections Code accompanied by more juvenile innuendo and exclamations. (The “BS!” and “Wrong!” interjections are particularly noteworthy.)

    A well-reasoned legal analysis it definitely is not.

    I echo Tim’s observation that Mr. Quirk finally started quoting bylaws (actually, Elections Code citations to be more precise), but thus far Mr. Quirk, and others, continue to fail to establish any basis for many of the accusations that have been leveled at Mr. Noonan.

    For the record, I am not “rooting” or “pulling for” any particular faction, as I am no longer a member of the party, and have no personal or political interest in the outcome.

    As a note of observation, I must admit that it is quite comical (and even frustrating to a certain extent) to decipher much of Mr. Quirk’s poorly-written “commentaries,” much of which constantly contains myriads of misspelled words and improper grammar. As a casual observer and a not-so-often participant on this forum, I naturally expect more from one who is bestowed the honorable title of “Senior Editor.”

    Then again, I am simply an observer who has “no say” over what goes on here.

  30. Cody Quirk Says:

    “BS!,” says Quirk.

    Is that what passes for reasoned debate on this site? “Somehow got the password” is not necessarily hacking, my friend.

    = They didn’t ‘accidently get it’ they bypassed it.

    You have yet to prove that anyone did anything illegal with the website, and saying “BS” a hundred times will not change that, but will only demonstrate to the TPW community how far your unsubstantiated hopes have exceeded your vocabulary.

    = The website was changed, against the majority of the officers and the state committee, who endorsed Baldwin and supported staying with the CP. That’s proof right there.

    The FACT is, at the time of this posting, you quoted nothing but opinion and hearsay. After much coaxing by Reed Heustis and myself, you finally started quoting bylaws (which Noonan’s faction has done all along), but you have failed to establish the basis for many of the accusations that have been leveled at Noonan since this issue arose.

    = If that article was no good. Richard winger wouldn’t have mentioned it. One example of the idiocy of the Ed Noonan side was the claim that the Convention had to be in Sacramento. It did not! It only said that the Committee meets in Sacramento in the Chapter that addresses the meetings of the State Central Committee, not the Convention.

    If I were you, I’d be a bit worried that a libel suit could be leveled over some of the writings on this site.

    = I dare them to do it.

    Ironically, it turns out that I am more sympathetic to the Baldwin faction in this mess, but the behavior and incompetence of you and some of your cohorts has been such that I’m almost persuaded to root for Noonan and the Keyesters, the insignificance of my support notwithstanding.

    = I don’t believe you, you can say you were going for Baldwin when even Ed Noonan can say something like that. Nice try.

    Once again I opine that people who vie to change government are so often in need of the nanny state to straighten out their petty messes. How are people supposed to trust the AIP to run their government when they can’t even run their own party?

    = Alan Keyes can’t even run a ballot access campaign, and you’re going for him.

    Enjoy ruling over the ruins.

    = People said that at Tampa. The CP has pretty much been viable since 2006.

  31. Cody Quirk Says:

    Not one person was named in that article.

    = A Religion was, and a political party.

    Therefore, there was neither character assassination nor libel against any particular individual.

    = It was libel against the CP and the LDS Church, you claimed that Mormons worship a “different” Jesus when there is only one Jesus Christ and one messiah. Your article was nothing but defamation and bigotry.
    But hey, I don’t have a problem with you posting it for everyone to see, in fact I oppose censoring your rhetoric; after all, it shows people that the Nevada issue wasn’t only about ‘abortion’, and exposes the motivation for kicking out the IAP.

    One may disagree wholeheartedly with my perception of certain false religions, which was expressed in the article with the term, “demonic Mormonism,” but to say that these words are akin to personal character assassination or the smearing of a person with unfounded charges against one’s ethics and whatnot, is hyperbole and wishful thinking.

    = Mormonism isn’t demonic, in fact I went through the Endowment Ceremony in the San Diego Temple and there wasn’t a single thing satanic about it. You smeared the LDS faith with false charges of being demonic and controlling the party, And you claim we worship a different Jesus, when Jesus didn’t even have a twin brother named after him.

    Criticizing false religion is not the same thing as character assassination, libel or slander. One is an apple, the other is an orange.

    = Both are fruit and both can be rotten & taste rotten at the same time.

    I don’t expect Mr. Quirk to be open to persuasion by my explanation, but people are totally free to make up their own minds by reading the article themselves.

    =Agreed. However when people like you claim the Nevada matter was all about abortion, I point to your writings, and the writings of John Lofton, Scott Whiteman and others for people to see.

    However, this thread is not about my articles though, so if anybody wishes to contact me personally about this, then please feel free to do so. My email address is listed on the site.

    = Better yet, would you be interested in smearing Mormonism on a LDS Discussion Forum?
    You are allowed to do so, as long as you follow the rules and are able to back up your claims.

  32. Cody Quirk Says:

    Frustratingly, the “research” showcased at the above URL is actually little more than mere cut-and-pastes of the California Elections Code accompanied by more juvenile innuendo and exclamations. (The “BS!” and “Wrong!” interjections are particularly noteworthy.)

    A well-reasoned legal analysis it definitely is not.

    = Would you care to cite the Cali. Election Codes on how Ed Noonan is 100% Justfied in his actions and arguments?

    I echo Tim’s observation that Mr. Quirk finally started quoting bylaws (actually, Elections Code citations to be more precise), but thus far Mr. Quirk, and others, continue to fail to establish any basis for many of the accusations that have been leveled at Mr. Noonan.

    = The bylaws & the Election Codes are the same. In California, the rules and regulations for ballot-qualified political parties is dictated by the State Government. Its been like that for a long, long time. BTW, you can say that the king has a robe on when he is actually naked.

    For the record, I am not “rooting” or “pulling for” any particular faction, as I am no longer a member of the party, and have no personal or political interest in the outcome.

    = Of course, your concern is the AHP. So how is the organizing coming for your California affiliate.

    As a note of observation, I must admit that it is quite comical (and even frustrating to a certain extent) to decipher much of Mr. Quirk’s poorly-written “commentaries,” much of which constantly contains myriads of misspelled words and improper grammar.

    =So? People can read it. In fact Mr. Winger took the liberty of mentioning it.

    As a casual observer and a not-so-often participant on this forum, I naturally expect more from one who is bestowed the honorable title of “Senior Editor.”

    = Then again, you said nothing when TPW posted that nice little piece on John Lofton and Libertarianism last month.

  33. clit Says:

    I couldimagine, and i realized they were tied by anal licking walter.

Leave a Reply