Sam Sloan vs. Warren Redlich, Index No. 108151/2010 as filed
samsloan
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
_______________________________________________________________
SAMUEL H. SLOAN,
Petitioner-Plaintiff,
-against-
Index no. 108151/2010
Warren Redlich
Eric Sundwall
Chris Edes
Mark Axinn
Libertarian Party of New York
Free Libertarian Party, Inc.
Respondents-Defendants.
________________________________________________________________________
VERIFIED PETITION
________________________________________________________________________
Samuel H. Sloan, the petitioner herein, being duly sworn, states:
1. This proceeding is brought under Election Law Sections 16-100 and
16-102 and other provisions of New York Law. No prior application has
been made for the relief requested herein.
2. Petitioner is a candidate for the Libertarian Party nomination for
election as Governor of the State of New York. Petitioner is a member
of the National Libertarian Party, the New York State Libertarian
Party, the Manhattan Libertarian Party and the Queens County
Libertarian Party. Petitioner is an elected member of the State
Committee of the Libertarian Party of New York State. Petitioner was
elected as the Manhattan Representative to the New York State
Libertarian Party at the annual convention of the Manhattan
Libertarian Party.
3. Defendant Warren Redlich is a candidate for Governor of the State
of New York. Warren Redlich not a Libertarian. He has never been a
member of the National Libertarian Party. He has never attended a
regular meeting of any chapter of the Libertarian Party. He has
adopted none of the principles of the Libertarian Party. None of the
platform planks of the National Libertarian Party are planks to the
Warren Redlich Campaign for Governor.
4. This case involves a scam by Warren Redlich and other defendants
named herein essentially to hijack and steal the name of the
Libertarian Party for the nefarious purposes of Warren Redlich. The
purpose of this scheme is by fraudulent means to deprive the members
of the Libertarian Party the opportunity to run their own candidate
for Governor of New York State and thereby to deprive the Voters of
New York State the opportunity to chose their governor.
5. Eric Sundwall was Chairman of the Libertarian Party of New York
State during the period 2006-2009. Chris Edes was the Chairman of the
Libertarian Party of New York State during the period 2009-2010. Mark
Axinn was elected Chairman of the Libertarian Party on New York State
on April 24, 2010 and is the current chairman of the New York
Libertarian Party.
5. The corporate name is the Free Libertarian Party Inc. but the name
in common use and before the New York State Board of Elections is the
Libertarian Party of New York.
6. The Libertarian Party of New York, also sometimes known as the Free
Libertarian Party to avoid confusion with the Liberal Party, has run a
candidate for Governor of the State of New York every four years
starting in 1974. This has required the party to obtain a minimum of
15,000 signatures every four years to get on the ballot. The
Libertarian Party has succeeded in doing this every time through the
efforts of dedicated volunteers. However, the Libertarian Party has
never obtained 50,000 votes for governor, which is a requirement for
permanent ballot status.
7. The Libertarian Party is a national party with headquarters in
Washington DC. It regularly runs candidates in national, state and
local elections. In 2008, the Libertarian Party had its candidate for
President of the United States on the ballot in 45 of the 50 states,
the only party to do so other than the Republicans and the Democrats.
On November 4, 2008, the Libertarian Party candidate for US President
received 523,686 votes nationwide.
8. The Libertarian Party held its annual convention in St. Louis
Missouri on May 28-31, 2010. Sam Sloan attended that convention as a
delegate from the State of New York. He also attended the previous
convention held 2008 in Denver, Colorado, also as a delegate from the
State of New York. Neither Warren Redlich nor Eric Sundwall have EVER
attended a convention or any other meeting of the National Libertarian
Party.
9. On or about December 30, 2009, Eric Sundwall, as Immediate Past
Chairman of the New York Libertarian Party, contacted selected
insiders of the New York Libertarian Party and asked them to join into
a scheme or conspiracy to secure the Libertarian Party nomination for
Warren Redlich without Warren Redlich ever having to go through the
normal vetting process traditionally require of candidates. The
Sundwall scheme was that the nomination for candidates would be closed
at the end of January 2010. No candidates would be allowed to run if
they did not declare by that date, even though the party convention
was scheduled to be held on April 24, 2010, nearly three months later.
Since it was expected that nobody would declare for the nomination by
the end of January, the Libertarian Party would be left without a
candidate. Since there would be no member of the Libertarian party
seeking the nomination, the party would be left no choice but to ask
Warren Redlich to become their candidate.
10. The reason for this convoluted scheme was that Warren Redlich did
not want to be known to be seeking the Libertarian Party nomination.
He was campaigning for the Republican Party nomination. He did not
want the Republicans to know that he was also seeking the Libertarian
Party nomination. He also did not want to appear before the
Libertarian Party to ask for our nomination. He wanted to appear to be
above it all.
11. Several Libertarian Party members who were not members of this
insider clique that had been contacted by Eric Sundwall became alarmed
at this and thereupon contacted Sam Sloan, a long-time member, and
asked him to declare for the nomination for Governor so that the
Sundwall Scheme of elimination of all possible opponents of Warren
Redlich would not succeed. Accordingly, Sam Sloan declared himself to
be a candidate on January 30, 2010, thereby squeaking in under the
deadline of the end of January for candidates other than Warren
Redlich to declare themselves.
12. In furtherance of his scheme or conspiracy to make Warren Redlich
the Libertarian Party Candidate without him ever declaring himself to
be a candidate, Eric Sundwall set up a “Draft Warren Redlich” website
at http://www.ericsundwall.com/2009/12/draft-redlich-for-governor.html
and he posted a video on youtube.com explaining why we should ask
Warren Redlich to become our candidate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lddG69CL0uI
.
13. The whole point to the Sundwall Scheme was to freeze out anybody
within the party so that the rank and file members of the Libertarian
Party would have no role and no choice in deciding who would be the
party's nominee. Since Warren Redlich was not a member of the
Libertarian Party and had no intention of joining and since
traditionally the party had only nominated members of its own ranks to
be candidates for high public office, the Sundwall Scheme depended for
its success on harassing, discrediting and eliminating all possible
opponents.
14. Warren Redlich was however campaigning for the Republican Party
nomination. Rather than setting forth a positive platform, the Redlich
campaign consisted of cyber-stalking and impersonating his opponents,
thereby discrediting them. In this connection, he has set up the
domain name and website andrew-cuomo.com impersonating Democratic
Candidate Andrew Cuomo and he has set up the domain name and website
rick-lazio.com impersonating Republican Candidate Rick Lazio. He also
took over the campaign website of Christine O'Donnell which she had
used during her run for US Senate at christineodonnell08.com and he
set up a website impersonating Ken Runion, who was his opponent in the
election for Town Supervisor at kenrunion.com . In addition, Warren
Redlich has set up websites attacking Carl Paladino at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOozaSYm0K4 .
15. Warren Redlich has asked his supporters to post negative comments
to the Facebook pages of his election opponents Andrew Cuomo and Rick
Lazio. In short, the campaign strategy of Warren Redlich is to flood
the Internet with negative and misleading remarks about all of his
potential opponents, without ever posting a positive platform of his
own.
16. Warren Redlich did no campaigning for the Libertarian Party
nomination, except that he was invited to give a speech to the
Convention of the Manhattan Libertarian Party on January 30, 2010,
when the party chairman did not realize that Warren Redlich intended
to become a candidate. His speech consisted entirely of “Ten Reasons
Why I am Not Qualified to be The Libertarian Party Candidate for
Governor” including “I have never been caught with a prostitute”, “I
have never been convicted of a felony”, “I have never been married to
more than one woman at the same time” and other insulting remarks
about Libertarians. He left immediately after completing his speech
and did not allow questioning or otherwise attend the meeting.
17. In spite of efforts of the insiders clique led by Eric Sundwall to
freeze out all other potential candidates leaving Warren Redlich
unopposed, two other candidates emerged, Sam Sloan, the petitioner
herein, and Kristin Davis, better known as the “Manhattan Madam”, who
claims to have supplied prostitutes to Governor Elliott Spitzer.
18. Scott Lieberman, a member of the Credentials Committee of the
National Libertarian Party, came to New York to organize a meet-up of
the candidates for Governor held at O'Grady's Bar on 46th Street in
Manhattan on April 11, 2010. All of the leading and most prominent
members of the New York Libertarian Party were invited and did attend.
However, Warren Redlich and Eric Sundwall were invited but did not
attend the meet-up. Sam Sloan and Kristin Davis did attend the meet-up
and answered all questions by members and officers of the New York
Libertarian Party.
19. A Candidates Debate was organized by the Manhattan and Queens
Libertarian Parties and was held at the Ukrainian Restaurant on Second
Avenue and 9th Streets on April 12, 2010. Warren Redlich and Eric
Sundwall were invited but did not attend the debate. Warren Redlich
stated that he had already been “assured” of the nomination by the
Libertarian Party and it was therefore “not important” that he attend.
Sam Sloan and Kristin Davis attended, although Kristin Davis had to
leave early after answering questions to attend a major media event.
20. Article 11 Section 6 of National Libertarian Party By-laws stated:
"Any Party Member shall be provided, upon request and payment of
copying and mailing costs, a list of all names and addresses of all
elected delegates to a convention." (This by-law provision was
modified slightly at a subsequent meeting held on May 30, 2010)
21. On Monday April 5, 2010, Sam Sloan sent an email to the official
Libertarian Party State Committee email list at
lpny_co...@yahoogroups.com stating the following:
As I am seeking the LPNY Nomination for Governor of New York State, I
would like to conduct a mailing to the members (at my own expense of
course).
I am concerned that although I have been a member continuously since
2002 (I first joined in 1973), looking at the list of members, I know
almost none of them.
I feel that the candidates should be allowed to mail their campaign
platform to the members who will be voting on whom to nominate at the
convention on April 24.
Sam Sloan
22. At the meeting in O'Grady's Bar on April 11, 2010, Roger Stone,
Campaign Manager for Kristin Davis, asked to be provided with the
mailing addresses of the members of the Libertarian Party so that he
could mail the campaign literature by Kristin Davis to the members of
the party. Sam Sloan also asked for the same mailing list.
23. The question of providing the mailing list to prospective
candidates for governor was discussed at the scheduled Candidates
Debate on April 12, 2010 (the debate that all other candidates except
for Warren Redlich attended). All party officers present at the April
12, 2010 meeting agreed that those seeking the Libertarian Party
Nomination for Governor of New York State should be allowed to mail
their campaign literature to the voting members of the Party.
24. Subsequently, every officer of the Libertarian Party who expressed
an opinion on this subject stated that the candidates for the
Libertarian Party nomination for Governor should be allowed to mail
their campaign literature to the voting members, with the sole
exception of Chris Edes, the Chairman of the Party. However, Chris
Edes was also the only officer of the party who had the mailing list.
Eric Sundwall also had the mailing list because he was the Immediate
Past Chairman of the Party and had given the list to Chris Edes, even
though he was no longer an officer of the party. Eric Sundwall had a
complete or nearly complete list of the names, addresses, telephone
numbers and email addresses of all members of the New York Libertarian
Party, but no other candidate for governor had such a list.
25. This issue of the mailing list was actively discussed and debated
on the LPNY Committee List. All those who expressed an opinion on this
subject stated that Sam Sloan should be allowed to do a mailing to the
membership. There was some disagreement on how this should be done.
Some said that Sam Sloan should be given the list directly. Others
said that Sam Sloan should provide stuffed envelopes and a volunteer
would stick on the mailing labels. Still others said that a
professional and licensed mailing company should do the mailing at
Sloan's expense. However, these were just details, as every member of
the State Committee with the sole exception of Chris Edes stated that
the mailing should be allowed and Sam Sloan was willing to pay for it
regardless of which method was used.
26. Here are some examples of statements by members of the State
Committee:
On Aprl 5, 2010 Gary Popkin wrote:
I think it is the policy of Libertarian Parties to make their
membership lists available to anyone for legitimate purposes such as
this.
On April 5, 2010 M Carling wrote:
The normal ways to do this are either: a) The candidate gives the
letter to party and the party mails it to the list. The candidate pays
the hard and soft costs of the mailing. Or b) The candidate gives the
letter and the party gives the list to a bonded mailing house and the
candidate pays all the costs, generally including a small token list
rental fee such as 10 cents per address.
On April 5, 2010 Richard Copper wrote:
Mailing lists can be rented, and should not be sold or given away.
In a subsequent email the same day, Richard Cooper added:
Something like 10 cents each, supplied on labels. The understanding as
this is a rental is that you do not copy and reuse the list of names.
Any results you get of course become your names. I am not charging
you, but every candidate seeking the statewide list.
On April 5, 2010, Tom Stevens wrote:
the many candidates can agree to divide the costs by sending a flyer
in a single mailing or can choose to have the party send out a mailing
to all eligible members containing only that candidate's literature.
On the same day, Tom Stevens added:
I think we have an interest in allowing all potential candidates to
reach the delegates without imposing an undue burden on them.
I say we charge the candidates for the cost of the mailing and no
more.
On April 6, 2010, Mark Axinn, Chairman of the Manhattan Libertarian
Party and a practicing attorney wrote:
I agree.
Sam is a member of this Committee and a candidate for our nomination
for Statewide office.
The information he is requesting should be furnished to him (and any
other candidate who requests it) at cost.
We need money, but this is not the way to raise it.
I move that we make the information available to all candidates who
request it and require them to reimburse the party or any officer for
any cost involved.
In this case, I am not even sure what the cost would be if the list
could be emailed electronically as it was recently for the Convention
mailing.
Mark
However, on April 7, 2010, Chris Edes, the only member of the State
Committee to oppose allowing Sam Sloan to conduct this mailing,
stated:
As Libertarians, we have an obligation to safeguard the privacy of our
members (as well as, through the political process, that of all
Americans). Regardless of other considerations, it would not be
appropriate to expose our membership to the risk of being spammed,
given that this has happened already.
On April 9, 2010, Sam Sloan wrote:
I am planning to send a mailing of about 5 sheets of paper on two
sides, just enough to come under the limit for 44 cents postage. I
sent several mailings like this when I was running for office in the
United States Chess Federation and I was elected in a hotly contested
race.
On April 10, 2010, M Carling wrote:
Since this matter is both important and urgent, I suggest we have a
conference call soon to deal with it.
On April 12, 2010, Audrey Capozzi wrote:
Greetings:
I vote to allow candidates access to LPNY mailing lists and will
attend a meeting at either time stated.
Audrey
On April 15, 2010, Audrey Capozzi wrote:
Greetings:
What happened to the voting on line? Did we approve allowing
candidates to access list?
Audrey
On April 17, 2010 M Carling replied
There was no official voting. Per our bylaws, the first step is that a
motion has to be floated for three days so that it can be debated,
then the Chair calls for a vote to begin on a specific motion.
27. The problem was that although every member of the State Committee
with the sole exception of Chris Edes agreed that Sam Sloan should be
allowed to mail his campaign literature to the voting members, Chris
Edes was the only one who had the list and Chris Edes was refusing to
call for a vote on Mark Axinn's motion and Chris Edes also refused to
set up for a telephone conference call for a vote on the mailing list
question.
28. The obvious reason that Chris Edes did this was that he was the
part of the conspiracy along with his immediate predecessor Eric
Sundwall to guarantee the nomination to Warren Redlich. Had Sam Sloan
been allowed to mail his campaign literature to the 280 voting members
of the New York Libertarian Party, he would have won the nomination
for governor.
29. In addition to the above postings to the semi-public LPNY
Committee list, Sam Sloan exchanged several private emails with Chris
Eade in which Sam Sloan proposed several possible ways in which Sam
Sloan would be able to mail his campaign literature to the voting
membership. In each case, Chris Edes refused to agree to any method by
which Sam Sloan would be able to mail his campaign literature to the
voting members.
30. Finally, after everything else had failed, Sam Sloan wrote to
Chris Edes stating that if Chris Edes did not agree to allow Sam Sloan
to conduct his mailing by the afternoon of that day, he would file
suit. Chris Edes did not respond to Sam Sloan but stated on the
LPNY_Discuss list that he does not “cave” to legal threats.
31. Accordingly, Sam Sloan kept his promise and filed suit the
following day: Sam Sloan vs. Chris Edes, Index No. 401051/2010 . Due
to the somewhat lengthy procedures required both for pro se
petitioners and for anybody including lawyers to request and obtain a
temporary restraining order, it took until the morning of April 23,
2010 for this proceeding to reach a judge of the New York State
Supreme Court.
32. Sam Sloan sent his petition in Sam Sloan vs. Chris Edes, Index No.
401051/2010 to Chris Edes by email. He also posted the same petition
to five email lists of the LPNY and he sent it to a reporter of the
Albany Times Union who announced in on his website. In addition, the
Judge's courtroom clerk called Chris Edes twice and left voice
messages on his telephone.
33. On April 23, 2010, a Judge of the New York State Supreme Court
signed an order ordering Chris Edes to provide the mailing list to Sam
Sloan. Chris Edes and all other members of the Libertarian Party
concerned with this issue were notified that the judge had signed the
order on 2:36 PM of that day, just a few minutes after the order had
been signed.
34. Nevertheless, Chris Edes ignored the court order. Sam Sloan then
drove to Albany where the Libertarian Party Convention was scheduled
for the following morning. Sam Sloan arrived at 10:00 PM and found
Chris Edes attending a party and still refusing to give Sam Sloan the
mailing list.
35. On the following morning, before the convention was about to
start, Sam Sloan again asked Chris Edes for the mailing list. Chris
Edes replied that the order of the New York Supreme Court was
“invalid” and had “expired” and therefore he was ignoring the court
order.
36. Chris Edes stated that he had been advised by “competent counsel”
to ignore the order of the New York Supreme Court. That “competent
counsel” was in fact Warren Redlich.
37. Warren Redlich himself subsequently stated that “competent
counsel” had correctly informed Chris Edes to ignore the court order.
IRREGULRITIES IN THE VOTING
38. On the morning of April 24, 2010, an opportunity had been arranged
for the candidates to speak. However, those members present were not
allowed to ask questions of Warren Redlich. An opportunity for
questioning would have exposed his anti-Libertarian positions. Warren
Redlich entered the room the moment he was scheduled to speak and left
the room immediately after he had finished speaking, allowing no
questions.
39. That afternoon, the official meeting started. Warren Redlich was
not there. The Credentials Committee was at the door checking the
credentials of everybody seeking to enter the meeting room. The name
of Warren Redlich was not on the membership list, and thus he was not
eligible to enter the meeting.
40. About ten minutes after the meeting started without Warren Redlich
being present, Warren Redlich entered the room complaining that he had
not been given a red wristband allowing him to vote. Warren Redlich
was obviously ineligible to vote because he had not been a member of
the Libertarian Party in 2009 or 2010 (nor in any other year) and
membership in both 2009 and 2010 was required under the rules in order
to be eligible to vote.
41. Although Warren Redlich was obviously ineligible to attend the
meeting or to vote at the meeting, Mark Axinn made a motion to make
Warren Redlich a voting member for the purposes of this meeting. This
motion passed. Warren Redlich then left the room and came back wearing
a red wrist band entitling him to vote.
42. When the time came to vote, there were no ballots. Instead, Mark
Axinn tore up yellow sheets of paper and handed out batches of blank
pieces of paper, asking everyone to write on the pieces of paper the
name of the candidate they were voting for. A hat was passed around
for those present to drop into the hat the piece of paper with the
name written on it of the person they were voting for. There were no
tellers. Nobody was checking to make sure that only those eligible to
vote were voting or that each person voted only once. There were many
people in the room that nobody seemed to know who they were or whether
they were entitled to vote. When asked by a member about this highly
irregular method, Mark Axinn replied that they were operating on the
“honor System”.
43. During the vote, there were no tellers. Nobody was checking to be
sure that only those eligible to vote dropped votes into the hat.
Anybody could easily have dropped two of three votes into the hat.
Roberts Rules of Order, especially Section 46 of those rules, were not
followed.
44. When the vote count was announced, the vote was 27 for Redlich, 13
for Sloan and 4 abstentions. Supporters of Redlich expressed shock at
the result. They were expecting a wipe-out, with Sam Sloan getting
almost no votes. Supporters of Sloan on the other hand could not
understand how Redlich got 27 votes when he is not a Libertarian, had
done no campaigning and had not adopted any of the principles of the
Libertarian Party.
45. Since then, there have been no minutes of the meeting of April 24,
2010. No list has been made available of those who were present and
voting. There has been no way to verify that all those who voted were
eligible to vote. Mark Axinn stated at a meeting only one week ago
that he still has not obtained from Chris Edes a mailing list of
members of the New York Libertarian Party, even though Mark Axinn has
been Chairman of the Party since he took over from Chris Edes on April
24, 2010. Due to these extreme irregularities, the nomination of
Warren Redlich on April 24, 2010 is null and void.
Fraud By Warren Redlich in Securing the Libertarian Party Nomination
46. Warren Redlich has committed fraud on the members of the New York
Libertarian Party and thereby on the voters of New York State by
concealing facts about himself which, had the voters known them,
nobody would have voted for him. Among these are the following:
(a) Although Warren Redlich claimed to be a member of the state bar in
good standing, he failed to disclose he has twice been disciplined by
the New York State Bar. All of the judges of Guilderland Town where
Warren Redlich lives have disqualified themselves from hearing any
case involving Warren Redlich or his law firm.
(b) Warren Redlich failed to disclose that he has had new disciplinary
proceedings instituted against him by the Disciplinary Committee in
March 2010. These proceedings are now pending.
© On May 14, 2010, Warren Redlich filed suit in Albany federal court
against the Chief Judge of the New York State Appellate Division Third
Department and three top members of the Disciplinary Committee. The
case in Albany Federal Court is Redlich vs. Oakes, 10-cv-570. Warren
Redlich still has not disclosed this to the Libertarian Party
membership. This is likely to place the Libertarian Party in jeopardy
and disrepute because it makes the Libertarian Party seem like we are
supporting a suit against the highest judicial officers of New York
State. It also places us in the position where we may be suing the
very judge whose help we need to get our candidates on the ballot.
(d) Warren Redlich stated that he was going to campaign for the
Republican Party nomination thereby increasing his visibility as a
candidate. He has not done so. He did not attend the Republican Party
Convention on June 2, 2010 where the party decided on its candidate
for governor. (Warren Redlich's excuse was that he had to be in court
in Albany that day defending two drug dealers.)
(e) Warren Redlich stated that he was going to circulate petitions to
create a primary election for the Republican Party nomination. He has
not done do.
(f) Warren Redlich has done nothing to support the other Libertarian
Party Candidates for statewide office, including the candidates for
Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, Comptroller and two candidates
for United States Senate. He has never even mentioned their names.
(g) After securing the Libertarian Party nomination for Governor of
the State of New York, Warren Redlich immediately left the meeting
room and did not return. He was not present during the nominations for
his running mate for Lieutenant Governor, who turned out to be a
person opposed to Warren Redlich, nor did he participate in the
nominations for the other state wide candidates, including two
candidates for US Senate. He also did not attend a fund raising dinner
that evening to raise funds for his own campaign.
(h) Warren Redlich said that he was going to raise funds for the
Libertarian Party. He has raised no funds nor made any effort to do
so. Rather, he has stated that he expects the Libertarian Party to
provide him with funds, even though the Libertarian Party has made no
promises or representations along those lines.
(i) Warren Redlich has posted a website advertising his services as an
Election Law Expert and offering his services for a $5,000 retainer.
He lists as his main client Eric Sundwall, the same person who is his
campaign manager here, failing to disclose that Eric Sundwall has
never been able to get on the ballot. Warren Redlich's advertisements
fail to include the disclaimers required by the New York Bar for
lawyer's websites. This is the same issue over which Warren Redlich
has already been disciplined.
http://www.redlichlaw.com/election-law.html
(j) Warren Redlich has engaged in identity theft by establishing
websites impersonating people he opposes. For example, the website
www.kenrunion.com appears to be the website of Town Supervisor Ken
Runion. In reality, it is a Warren Redlich website impersonating Ken
Runion. Similarly the Warren Redlich website www.christineodonnell08.com
impersonates US Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell, the website
www.andrew-cuomo.com impersonates New York Attorney General Andrew
Cuomo and the website www.rich-lazio.com impersonates NY Governor
Candidate Rick Lazio.
(k) Warren Redlich has established a website listing “MILF” which
stands for “Mothers” with whom he would like to have sexual
intercourse. Included among the mothers on his list are not only Sarah
Palin and Hillary Clinton, but under-aged 16-year-old mothers Jamie
Lynn Spears and Bristol Palin. Warren Redlich has already been cited
by the New York State Bar for doing this but he refuses to take it
down.
http://www.thespoof.com/news/spoof.cfm?headline=s4i22153
(l) This is only the beginning. Everything about Warren Redlich is
slimy. He is basically a bad guy. There is nothing honest, upstanding
or reputable about Warren Redlich. He campaigns for office by
impersonating his opponents thereby discrediting them. He has brought
discredit and disrepute to the New York State and the National
Libertarian parties.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
47. The question is what should be done about this. This is a
difficult question. The following principles should be observed:
(a) In addition to the nomination of Warren Redlich for Governor,
there were several other nominations made on April 24, 2010. These
include the Libertarian Party nominations for Lieutenant Governor,
Attorney General, Comptroller and two candidates for United States
Senate. These nominations should be allowed to stand. Petitioner has
asked a majority of those nominated and all of them would like to see
Warren Redlich removed as a Libertarian Party candidate. None of them
were affected by the Sundwall Conspiracy and most were unopposed. It
is noteworthy that none of the candidates nominated for those
positions support Warren Redlich, nor does he support any of them.
(b) The Nomination of Warren Redlich on April 24, 2010 should be
declared invalid. He should be barred from running for office again.
© Warren Redlich should be replaced by Sam Sloan who finished second
or else there should be a new election held.
(d) All Candidates should be allowed to mail their campaign literature
to the voting members of the Libertarian Party of New York State in
time for them to vote.
(e) If there is to be a new vote it should be done in one of two ways:
1. A new convention or
2. An email ballot or postal mail ballot thereby saving the costs of
an new convention.
(f) This process should be started immediately, as the date to start
circulating petitions to get on the ballot in July 6, 2010.
(g) The above named individuals except for Mark Axinn and the party
itself should be ordered to pay damages of One Million Dollars.
WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons set forth above, the Petitioner
demands:
(a) The Nomination of Warren Redlich on April 24, 2010 should be
declared invalid.
(b) Warren Redlich should be barred from running for office again.
© Warren Redlich should be replaced by Sam Sloan who finished second
or else there should be a new election held.
(d) All legitimate Candidates should be allowed to mail their campaign
literature to the voting members of the Libertarian Party of New York
State in time for them to vote.
(e) If there is to be a new vote it should be done in one of two ways:
1. A new convention held or
2. An email ballot or postal mail ballot thereby saving the costs of
an new convention.
(f) The above named individuals except for Mark Axinn (but not the
party itself) should be ordered to pay damages of One Million Dollars.
and (g) Such other and further relief as may be deemed just and
equitable.
________________________
Samuel H. Sloan
Sworn to Before me this 21st
Day of June 2010
_________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
________________________
Samuel H. Sloan
1664 Davidson Avenue, Apt. 1B
Bronx NY 10453
917-507-7226
917-659-3397
sams...@gmail.com
STATE OF NEW YORK )
ss:
COUNTY OF NEW YORK )
VERIFICATION
I, the undersigned, the petitioner named in the foregoing petition,
being duly sworn, says:
I have read the foregoing petition subscribed by me and know the
contents thereof and the same is true of my own knowledge, except as
to those matters herein stated to be alleged upon information and
belief and as to those matters I believe it to be true.
__________________________________
Signature of Petitioner
On the 21st Day of June, 2010 before me personally came Samuel H.
Sloan to me known to be the person described herein and who executed
the foregoing instrument. Such person duly swore to such instrument
before me and duly acknowledged that he executed the same.
_____________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
samsloan
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
_______________________________________________________________
SAMUEL H. SLOAN,
Petitioner-Plaintiff,
-against-
Index no. 108151/2010
Warren Redlich
Eric Sundwall
Chris Edes
Mark Axinn
Libertarian Party of New York
Free Libertarian Party, Inc.
Respondents-Defendants.
________________________________________________________________________
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
________________________________________________________________________
Samuel H. Sloan, the petitioner herein, being duly sworn, states:
1. I am a candidate for the Libertarian Party Nomination for Governor
of the State of New York.
2. This proceeding is brought under Election Law Sections 16-100 and
16-102 and other provisions of New York Law. No prior application has
been made for the relief requested herein.
2. As more fully set forth in the accompanying Verified Petition and
Complaint, Defendant-Respondent Eric Sundwall, who is a former
Chairman of the Libertarian Party of New York State but is no longer
an officer of the Libertarian Party, hatched a scheme to secure the
Libertarian Party Nomination for Governor of the State of New York for
his friend and associate Warren Redlich, without going though the
normal campaign process. The basic plan or scheme of Eric Sundwall was
to eliminate all possible opponents of Warren Redlich so that the
party would have no choice but to ask Warren Redlich to become its
candidate.
3. Warren Redlich is a bad guy. He is a disreputable character known
for cyber-stalking, impersonating and harassing his targets. He
engages in identity theft, setting up fake websites that appear to be
the websites of his election opponents. He has been disciplined twice
by the New York State Bar but he continues to do the same things for
which he has already been disciplined. A third disciplinary proceeding
is now pending against him. All of the judges of Guilderland Town have
disqualified themselves from hearing any case involving Warren Redlich
or his law firm. He posts semi-porn websites advocating sex with 13-
year-old girls and provides a list of under-aged girls with whom he
would like to have sexual intercourse. All of this was non-disclosed
and concealed from the Libertarian Party membership. Had the members
of the party known about this they would never have considered Warren
Redlich for the Libertarian Party Nomination for the Governor of the
State of New York.
4. In furtherance of the nefarious scheme of Eric Sundwall to secure
the Libertarian Party nomination for Warren Redlich by freezing out
and eliminating all other possible candidates, Sundwall privately
contacted selected insiders with his plan to rig the election. Among
those contacted was Chris Edes of Rochester, the then Chairman of the
New York State Libertarian Party, who joined in this scheme. Eric
Sundwall had a complete or nearly complete list of the names,
addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses of all members of the
New York Libertarian Party, but no other potential candidate for
governor had such a list.
5. Several Party members found out about the Sundwall Scheme and
contacted me, Sam Sloan, asking me to declare myself a candidate to
stop the Sundwall-Edes-Redlich Clique. (I believe that there were
several other potential candidates for governor from within the Party
ranks, but seeing the hand-writing on the wall, they were unwilling to
do battle with the Sundwall-Edes-Redlich group.)
6. I campaigned as hard as I possibly could for the Libertarian party
nomination. I sent out hundreds of emails, attended meetings, secured
endorsements from prominent party members, etc. I mailed my campaign
literature to 104 present or former Libertarians. However, I did not
have the current list and few of them were current members of the New
York libertarian Party. On the other hand, Warren Redlich did no
campaigning at all. He said that he was unable to spend any of his own
money on his campaign because his wife would not allow it. Warren
Redlich attended no party meetings and did nothing to secure the
nomination. When asked about it, he said that his nomination by the
Libertarian Party had been assured, so it was “not important” for him
to campaign.
7. On April 5, 2010, I asked to be allowed to conduct a campaign
mailing to the voting membership of the Libertarian party. All members
of the State Committee who expressed an opinion said that I should be
allowed to conduct this mailing, with the sole exception of Chris
Edes, who obviously realized that if I was allowed to mail my campaign
literature to the 280 members of the New York Libertarian Party, that
would upset the apple cart and I would get the nomination.
8. After exhausting all other avenues to try to resolve this issue, I
was left with no choice but to file suit. On April 23, 2010, a Judge
of the New York Supreme Court ordered Chris Edes to give me the
mailing list. Although Chris Edes was personally served with the
order, he refused to obey it. He even told me on April 24, 2010 that
the order was invalid and had expired. Chris Edes was in open defiance
of a court order and still to this day has not obeyed it.
9. Because Chris Edes refused to obey the court order, because the
members of the Libertarian Party were not informed of the bad
character and misconduct of Warren Redlich, because of extreme
irregularities in the conduct of the convention by Chris Edes and the
vote count, and because of other factors as set forth in the
complaint, it was announced at the Party Convention in Albany on April
24, 2010 that Warren Redlich had received the nomination with 27 votes
for him, 13 votes for me and 4 abstentions.
10. Had the election campaign, the voting and the other proceedings
been conducted in the normal, even-handed way without any rigging of
the election, I would have received the nomination.
11. At a hearing held in Manhattan Supreme Court on May 23, 2010, a
judge of the New York Supreme Court held Chris Edes in contempt of
court for his willful disobedience of the court order. The judge said
that the only reason Chris Edes was not being put in jail was that I
had not requested it. A copy of the full transcript of that hearing is
attached hereto an an exhibit.
12. Since then, further actions or non-actions by Warren Redlich have
demonstrated that his so-called “campaign” for Governor of the State
of New York was utterly fraudulent from the beginning and just for the
purpose of obtaining personal publicity for himself and his law firm.
He had stated that he would ask the Republican Party to include him in
a primary ballot. He did not even attend the Republican party
Convention on June 2, 2010 where such nominations were considered. He
had stated that he would be circulating his own petitions to become a
Republican Party candidate. He has not done so and the time to start
circulating such petitions has passed. It turns out that he was asking
an independent political group to circulate petitions for him, but
that group has declined to do so. Now, he wants the other Libertarian
Party Candidates to contribute money to his campaign, but none of them
are willing to do so. Warren Redlich promised to raise funds but he
has raised no funds, and so on.
13. A further negative development is that on June 5, 2010, the State
Committee voted to suspend Tom Stevens from Membership in the New York
Libertarian Party. Tom Stevens was an outspoken critic of Warren
Redlich and his membership was suspended in part for that reason. Tom
Stevens is Political Director of the Queens Libertarian Party and is
the mentor of three of the six statewide candidates. As a result, all
of those three candidates have withdrawn the last semblances of
support for Warren Redlich and will not be contributing any money to
the Redlich Campaign. This constitutes the death knell for the Redlich
campaign and virtually guarantees that Warren Redlich will not get the
15,000 signatures to get on the ballot, especially since Warren
Redlich himself promises to contribute no money nor any effort to the
campaign drive.
14. The time is short and at hand. The Libertarian Party is scheduled
to start circulating petitions to get on the ballot on July 6, 2010.
Thus, this matter needs to be resolved almost immediately. Therefore,
I am asking this court to enter an order to show cause setting this
matter for an immediate hearing. I am also asking for a temporary
restraining order against Warren Redlich restraining and enjoining him
from stating that he is the Libertarian Party candidate for Governor
until a hearing can be held on this motion.
15. Warren Redlich has run or tried to run for election many times
under different parties and consistently has performed the same
plethora of dirty tricks as he has done here. This is his modus
operandi. He is fundamentally dishonest. He is a bad person, an evil
man. Therefore, I am asking this court to enjoin him from running for
public office again.
WHEREFORE, for all of the reasons set forth above, Petitioner prays
that an order be entered directing the respondents to Show Cause why
an order should not be made
(a) Declaring the Nomination of Warren Redlich as the Libertarian
Party Candidate for Governor to be invalid, null and void.
(b) Declaring that Warren Redlich is barred from running for office
again.
© Replacing Warren Redlich with Sam Sloan who finished second or else
declaring there should be a new election held.
(d) Declaring that all legitimate Candidates for Governor of the State
of New York should be allowed to mail their campaign literature to the
voting members of the Libertarian Party of New York State immediately
in time for them to vote.
(e) If there is to be a new vote it should be done in one of two ways:
1. A new convention held or
2. An email ballot or postal mail ballot thereby saving the costs of
an new convention.
and (f) Such other and further relief as may be deemed just and
equitable.
And it is further requested that this court order that Warren Redlich
is temporarily restrained and enjoined from stating that he is the
Libertarian Party candidate for Governor until a hearing can be held
on this motion.
Teddybear
election, yoiu will file more lawsuits and appeals, claiming some sort of
dirty deeds. This ill go on for years until it's all finally thrown out.
How many times does this cycle repeat before something changes?
Oh yeah, "8. After exhausting all other avenues to try to resolve this
issue, I was left with no choice but to file suit." I have another choice
for you, give up. That's what people who respect our Constitution do when
they lose. If everyone that runs for office and loses, takes it to the
Courts, then majority rule would be at an end. I believe you are violating
the spirit of the Party you seek to represent.
samsloan
vs. Redlich, Index No. 108151/2010
This Order to Show Cause requires the opposition parties to file their
papers by June 29, 2010. Then there will be a hearing held in
Courtroom 438 on July 7, 2010 at 10:00 AM
The judge will go on vacation immediately after that so it can be said
for certain that the case will be decided on July 7, 2010.
I pressed for an earlier date, pointing out that the petitioning
period starts on July 6, 2010. I also waived my right to file reply
papers in order to get this early a date. Otherwise, the judge was
going to hold the hearing on July 27, after she comes back from
vacation.
Sam Sloan
Mark Houlsby
What do you hope to achieve? From your viewpoint, what's the best
possible outcome
of this process?
I'm genuinely curious to know.
Mark Houlsby
samsloan
items about Warren Redlich. For example, the following article in
today's Times Union:
http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=942437&category=REGION
Lawyer wants court to overturn sanctions
Guilderland's Redlich calls ruling on town court, website unfair
Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=942437&category=REGION#ixzz0rpT2vWgj
Here is the Guilderland Town website. Almost the entire website
consists of negative views about Warren Redlich:
http://www.guilderland.com/letters/a-different-view-doesnt-make-someone-irrational/
Look at this article, entitled:
"When is Warren Redlich going to stop wasting Guilderland Taxpayer
Money?"
Why do the members on the New York Libertarian Party ignore what his
own townspeople are saying about our candidate?
samsloan
<jeffe...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Thanks for the links, Sam! These are actually pretty positive from a
> libertarian point of view.
>
>
>
> *Look at this article, entitled: "When is Warren Redlich going to stop
> *wasting Guilderland Taxpayer Money?"
> *
> *http://www.guilderland.com/warren-redlich-for-governor/when-is-warren-redlich-going-to-stop-wasting-guilderland-taxpayer-money/
> *
>
> That link goes to a comment criticizing Warren for siding with a local
> business that is suing Guilderland because their taxes are too high. The
> town wants to soak its businesses and Warren says No!
>
> Other pages at the site criticize Warren for: a.) wanting to abolish
> Homeland Security; b.) being against gun control laws; c.) wanting to cap
> the pay of government workers; d.) criticizing the news media and the
> religious right for their take on Miley Cyrus photos; and e.) being against
> the way DWI laws are enforced.
>
>
>
> *Why do the members on the New York Libertarian Party ignore what his
> *own townspeople are saying about our candidate?
>
> Ummm, maybe because the people writing those criticisms are Democrats!
>
>
> Jeff Doty
You are absolutely right and I noticed that too.
Several of the negative articles about Warren Redlich on the official
Guilderland Town website are positive from the Libertarian point of
view.
However, here is one on which I do not see how you can put a positive
spin:
Warren Redlich, "Web Entrepreneuer", Cyberstalker or Identity
Squatter"
It lists six websites where Warren Redlich has impersonated one of his
election opponents:
http://www.christineodonnell08.com
Is this the sort of activity that Libertarians want to be known for
supporting?
It is amazing how the official website of a town can be filled with
articles attacking one of its citizens.
Greegor
> spin:
>
>
> Warren Redlich, "Web Entrepreneuer", Cyberstalker or Identity
> Squatter"
>
> It lists six websites where Warren Redlich has impersonated one of his
> election opponents:
Have you presented this to the Libertarian party officials?
I'd like to see what the Libertarian party response
is to this identity squatting or cyberstalking.
His party hopping is worth running by them as well.
While some former Republicans might be good
converts for the Libertarians, certainly when
some RINO (Republican In Name Only)
who is more like a Democrat gets dumped out,
I would not think the Libertarians would want them.
The fact this guy hopped from Republican to Green
to Libertarian sounds rather problematic, too.
Mark Houlsby
> In case you have any doubt about this, take a look at some recent news
> items about Warren Redlich. For example, the following article in
> today's Times Union:
>
>
> Lawyer wants court to overturn sanctions
> Guilderland's Redlich calls ruling on town court, website unfair
>
>
> Here is the Guilderland Town website. Almost the entire website
> consists of negative views about Warren Redlich:
>
>
> Look at this article, entitled:
> "When is Warren Redlich going to stop wasting Guilderland Taxpayer
> Money?"
>
>
> Why do the on the New York Libertarian Party ignore what his
> own townspeople are saying about our candidate?
Sam
I have no doubts. Why are you posting this to a chess newsgroup?
Do you seriously imagine that your doing this WON'T be a big help
to your opponents?
If so....reimagine....
Why does Sam Sloan habitually ignore simple rules that a six-year-
old could follow and which, indeed, are easier to follow than to break?
Mark Houlsby
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Jeffery Doty
>
>
>
>
>
> <jefferyd...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > Thanks for the links, Sam! These are actually pretty positive from a
> > libertarian point of view.
>
> > *Look at this article, entitled: "When is Warren Redlich going to stop
> > *wasting Guilderland Taxpayer Money?"
> > *
> > *
>
> > That link goes to a comment criticizing Warren for siding with a local
> > business that is suing Guilderland because their taxes are too high. The
> > town wants to soak its businesses and Warren says No!
>
> > Other pages at the site criticize Warren for: a.) wanting to abolish
> > Homeland Security; b.) being against gun control laws; c.) wanting to cap
> > the pay of government workers; d.) criticizing the news media and the
> > religious right for their take on Miley Cyrus photos; and e.) being against
> > the way DWI laws are enforced.
>
> > *Why do the members on the New York Libertarian Party ignore what his
> > *own townspeople are saying about our candidate?
>
> > Ummm, maybe because the people writing those criticisms are Democrats!
>
> > Jeff Doty
>
> You are absolutely right and I noticed that too.
>
> Several of the negative articles about Warren Redlich on the official
> Guilderland Town website are positive from the Libertarian point of
> view.
>
> However, here is one on which I do not see how you can put a positive
> spin:
>
>
> Warren Redlich, "Web Entrepreneuer", Cyberstalker or Identity
> Squatter"
>
> It lists six websites where Warren Redlich has impersonated one of his
> election opponents:
>
> http://www.philsteck.com
>
> http://www.traceybrooks.com/
>
> http://www.kenrunion.com
>
> http://www.christineodonnell08.com
>
> http://www.rick-lazio.com
>
> http://www.andrew-cuomo.com
>
> Is this the sort of activity that Libertarians want to be known for
> supporting?
>
> It is amazing how the official website of a town can be filled with
> articles attacking one of its citizens.
Is crossposting this shit to a chess newsgroup the sort of activity
that Libertarians want to be known for supporting?
It is amazing that the sociopath Sam Sloan can crosspost shit all
over Usenet with such frequency without facing opprobrium.
What is more amazing is that Mr. "I'm above the rules" Sam Sloan
fails to realize:
a) that the idea of running for office necessarily attracts unpopular
people, possibly more often than not
and
b) that by consistently acting as if laws don't apply to him, although
laudably libertarian in spirit, Sam Sloan is engineering his own
undoing.
Assuming he's ever done in the first instance, that is....
samsloan
with any of these sites. I just found them through a simple Google
search.
Two of the six sites I list were originally set up as campaign
websites. Later, the person campaigning either won or lost the
election and allowed the domain name to expire. Then, Warren Redlich
snapped it up and is now using it to attack the original owner.
It is evident that there are a number of people in Guilderland who
very much dislike Warren Redlich.
I have never put up a fake website nor have I ever impersonated
anyone. I am proud of everything I write and always sign my name to
it.
(I am often impersonated however.)
The Real Sam Sloan
On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 7:58 AM, gary popkin <garyp...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
There's something mighty suspicious here. The official Town of
Guilderland site, from the New York State citizens site, is this:
http://www.townofguilderland.org/Pages/index
The site Sam is promulgating is this:
A Google search on "Town of Guilderland" lists the official site
first. Sam's site is nowhere to be seen.
Is it odd that Sam's site has a whole section on Redlich but none
about any other board member? Perhaps Sam himself is guilty of
impersonating a Town. In any case, the Redlich section is a great
summary of libertarian views at the Town level. Too bad no one but we
will be seeing this site.
Nowhere does the Andrew-Cuomo site represent itself as an official
Cuomo site. The site is totally negative about him and is obviously an
opposition site, not an impersonation.
On Jun 25, 4:26 am, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Jeffery Doty
>
>
>
> <jefferyd...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > Thanks for the links, Sam! These are actually pretty positive from a
> > libertarian point of view.
>
> > *Look at this article, entitled: "When is Warren Redlich going to stop
> > *wasting Guilderland Taxpayer Money?"
> > *
> > *http://www.guilderland.com/warren-redlich-for-governor/when-is-warren...
> > *
>
> > That link goes to a comment criticizing Warren for siding with a local
> > business that is suing Guilderland because their taxes are too high. The
> > town wants to soak its businesses and Warren says No!
>
> > Other pages at the site criticize Warren for: a.) wanting to abolish
> > Homeland Security; b.) being against gun control laws; c.) wanting to cap
> > the pay of government workers; d.) criticizing the news media and the
> > religious right for their take on Miley Cyrus photos; and e.) being against
> > the way DWI laws are enforced.
>
> > *Why do the members on the New York Libertarian Party ignore what his
> > *own townspeople are saying about our candidate?
>
> > Ummm, maybe because the people writing those criticisms are Democrats!
>
> > Jeff Doty
>
> You are absolutely right and I noticed that too.
>
> Several of the negative articles about Warren Redlich on the official
> Guilderland Town website are positive from the Libertarian point of
> view.
>
> However, here is one on which I do not see how you can put a positive
> spin:
>
> http://www.guilderland.com/warren-redlich-for-governor/warren-redlich...
jkh001
> On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 1:25 AM, Jeffery Doty
>
>
>
>
>
> <jefferyd...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > Thanks for the links, Sam! These are actually pretty positive from a
> > libertarian point of view.
>
> > *Look at this article, entitled: "When is Warren Redlich going to stop
> > *wasting Guilderland Taxpayer Money?"
> > *
> > *
>
> > That link goes to a comment criticizing Warren for siding with a local
> > business that is suing Guilderland because their taxes are too high. The
> > town wants to soak its businesses and Warren says No!
>
> > Other pages at the site criticize Warren for: a.) wanting to abolish
> > Homeland Security; b.) being against gun control laws; c.) wanting to cap
> > the pay of government workers; d.) criticizing the news media and the
> > religious right for their take on Miley Cyrus photos; and e.) being against
> > the way DWI laws are enforced.
>
> > *Why do the members on the New York Libertarian Party ignore what his
> > *own townspeople are saying about our candidate?
>
> > Ummm, maybe because the people writing those criticisms are Democrats!
>
> > Jeff Doty
>
> You are absolutely right and I noticed that too.
>
> Several of the negative articles about Warren Redlich on the official
> Guilderland Town website are positive from the Libertarian point of
> view.
>
> However, here is one on which I do not see how you can put a positive
> spin:
>
>
> Warren Redlich, "Web Entrepreneuer", Cyberstalker or Identity
> Squatter"
>
> It lists six websites where Warren Redlich has impersonated one of his
> election opponents:
>
> http://www.philsteck.com
>
> http://www.traceybrooks.com/
>
> http://www.kenrunion.com
>
> http://www.christineodonnell08.com
>
> http://www.rick-lazio.com
>
> http://www.andrew-cuomo.com
>
> Is this the sort of activity that Libertarians want to be known for
> supporting?
>
> It is amazing how the official website of a town can be filled with
>
> - Show quoted text -
Sam, were you under the delusion that no one would actually look at
those links? No one with an IQ above 70 could possibly mistake any of
them for "identity theft." They all start with attacks on the named
individual, and are standard if heavy-handed political attack
broadsides. "Cybersquatting," yes, but while some consider that
unethical, it is not illegal. And considering the number of times you
have hidden behind the 1st Amendment (and Times v Sullivan) to publish
distortions, unprovable claims, and outright lies, for you to whine
about Redlich is risible. But I suppose, as usual, those rules only
apply to other people. If you actually believed that _all_ laws were
illegitimate, you would at least be consistent with one strain of
libertarianism (albeit a rather pointless one). But you've never shown
any hesitation about trying to use the power of the courts to harass
your enemies, while contemptuously ignoring the law yourself. It
speaks well of the NY Libertarian Party that you lost the nomination.
It doesn't speak well of them that you got any votes at all.
Mark Houlsby
It might not be unreasonable to suggest that Sloan's world-view
consists
almost entirely of delusions.
Mark Houlsby
> I can assure Gary and anybody else who asks that I have nothing to do
> with any of these sites. I just found them through a simple Google
> search.
>
> Two of the six sites I list were originally set up as campaign
> websites. Later, the person campaigning either won or lost the
> election and allowed the domain name to expire. Then, Warren Redlich
> snapped it up and is now using it to attack the original owner.
>
> It is evident that there are a number of people in Guilderland who
> very much dislike Warren Redlich.
>
> I have never put up a fake website nor have I ever impersonated
> anyone. I am proud of everything I write and always sign my name to
> it.
>
> (I am often impersonated however.)
>
> The Real Sam Sloan
>
> wrote:
>
> There's something mighty suspicious here. The official Town of
> Guilderland site, from the New York State citizens site, is this:
>
> http://www.townofguilderland.org/Pages/index
>
> The site Sam is promulgating is this:
>
> http://www.guilderland.com/
>
> A Google search on "Town of Guilderland" lists the official site
> first. Sam's site is nowhere to be seen.
>
> Is it odd that Sam's site has a whole section on Redlich but none
> about any other board member? Perhaps Sam himself is guilty of
> impersonating a Town. In any case, the Redlich section is a great
> summary of libertarian views at the Town level. Too bad no one but we
> will be seeing this site.
>
> Nowhere does the Andrew-Cuomo site represent itself as an official
> Cuomo site. The site is totally negative about him and is obviously an
> opposition site, not an impersonation.
>
Astuteness was never Sam Sloan's strong suit.
Mental activity of any kind was never Sloan's strong suit...
Mark Houlsby
> On Jun 25, 9:49 am, Mark Houlsby <mark.houl...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
> > Mental activity of any kind was never Sloan's strong suit...
>
>
> [Event "American Open"]
> [Site "Santa Monica (USA)"]
> [Date "1967.11.26"]
> [Round "3"]
> [White "Sloan,Sam"]
> [Black "Browne,Walter S (USA)"]
> [Result "1-0"]
> [ECO "B31"]
>
> 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 g6 4.O-O Bg7 5.c3 Nf6 6.Re1 O-O 7.d4 cxd4
> 8.cxd4 d5 9.e5 Ne4 10.Nc3 Nxc3 11.bxc3 Qa5 12.Bf1 Bg4 13.Qd3 Bxf3
> 14.gxf3 e6 15.Bh3 Rfc8 16.Be3 Qa3 17.Bf1 Na5 18.Qb5 a6 19.Qb4 Rxc3
> 20.Qxa3 Rxa3 21.Rec1 b5 22.Rc5 Bf8 23.Rc7 Nc4 24.Bxc4 dxc4 25.h4 Rc3
> 26.h5 b4 27.hxg6 hxg6 28.Kg2 a5 29.d5 Bg7 30.dxe6 fxe6 31.Rh1 Rc2
> 32.Rb7 Rxa2 33.Bg5 Rf8 34.Bf6 Rxf6 35.exf6 Bxf6 36.Rb8+ Kg7 37.Rb7+
> Be7 38.Rxe7+ Kf6 39.Rhh7 Ke5 40.f4+ Kd6 41.Rc7 Kd5 42.Rhd7+ Ke4
> 43.Rxc4+ Kf5 44.Rf7+ Kg4 45.f5+ Kg5 46.fxe6 Re2 47.e7 b3 48.e8=Q Rxe8
> 49.Rb7 1-0
>
> That '1-0' was not a typo. Sam Sloan thumped Walter Brown.
>
> I don't know, but it seems to me that more than a few of the trolls
> around
> here need to reassess their 'contributions' (i.e. merely firing random
> shots
> at a few rgc regulars who are very easy targets) to rgc. Is there
> really any
> point in continuing to ridicule the insane, beat up the mentally
> retarded,
> stomp on their broken shards of credibility, or perhaps unfairly
> single out
> those you happen to personally dislike?
>
> Sorry for interrupting your angry ranting with something that is in
> some
> small way related to the subject of chess. BTW, in case you haven't
> yet
> figured it out: the lawsuit post is relevant here in rgc because SS is
> a bone
> fide chess celebrity(?!!) and so everything connected with him is of
> interest
> to chess players -- even if he were to get buried in Iceland and later
> dug up
> for DNA paternity testing. Or was that Fischer? It's easy to confuse
> these
> super-celebs.
Er... yes... I know that Sam can play chess. What he can't do is
follow simple rules like:
don't crosspost to irrelevant newsgroups.
Just between you and me, Ray Lopez is not Phil Innes.
Phil posts to RGC* and HLAS. See:
RL posts to RGC*, comp.os.linux.advocacy, misc.invest.stocks,
alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt, alt.comp.os.linux,
comp.os.linux.setup, alt.idiots, alt.comp.anti-virus, sci.physics,
gnu.misc.discuss, alt.philosophy, alt.global-warming,
Atheism vs Christianity, microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp,
de.comp.os.unix.linux.misc, Molecular Biology Online,
alt.flame.rednecks, tx.politics, soc.history, alt.history.what-if,
alt.morons, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sci.econ, sci.environment,
soc.culture.usa, alt.machines.cnc, alt.politics.economics,
alt.energy.renewable, aus.invest, comp.text.xml, alt.politics,
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.windowsforms.controls,
sci.econ.research, Sun Microsystems, Inc.,
ABRAXIS BIOSCIENCE INC., Provident Energy Trust (USA), General
Electric Company, la.general,
microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet, Bank of America Corporation,
Crocs, Inc. and misc.writing -that last one
especially amusing.
See:
Just two simple Google searches uncovered these very basic facts.
So CLEARLY, RL is ****not**** PKI. Only a complete fucking moron could
mistake them for being one and the same.
Now, FYI, the REASON why I admonish our Sam for his deranged
crossposting is precisely that it furnishes his ENEMIES
with AMMUNITION to use AGAINST HIM.
THEREFORE, it would be better if he did not do it.
FYI, in the immediate aftermath of the "Peter Leko is dead" fiasco, I
was one of only a very few people who wrote in Sloan's
DEFENCE (I replied to a post by Euclides Zoto). If you're too fucking
moronic to find it, I'll post a link.
But only if you beg me really nicely.
You're a fucking moron. In fact, calling you a fucking moron is an
insult to most self-respecting fucking morons.
Why not go do something useful, like sawing off all of your fingers,
so you can't post any more of your BS?
Just a thought.
Mark Houlsby
> On Jun 28, 9:26 pm, Mark Houlsby <mark.houl...@lycos.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Er... yes... I know that Sam can play chess. What he can't do is
> > follow simple rules like:
> > don't crosspost to irrelevant newsgroups.
>
> > Just between you and me, Ray Lopez is not Phil Innes.
>
> > Phil posts to RGC* and HLAS. See:
>
>
> > RL posts to RGC*, comp.os.linux.advocacy, misc.invest.stocks,
> > alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt, alt.comp.os.linux,
> > comp.os.linux.setup, alt.idiots, alt.comp.anti-virus, sci.physics,
> > gnu.misc.discuss, alt.philosophy, alt.global-warming,
> > Atheism vs Christianity, microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp,
> > de.comp.os.unix.linux.misc, Molecular Biology Online,
> > alt.flame.rednecks, tx.politics, soc.history, alt.history.what-if,
> > alt.morons, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
>
>
Ok, but it's more than two groups, and RGC* aside, they're all
*completely
different*. So your suggestion that they're they same person was
typically
FUCKING MORONIC.
> > sci.econ, sci.environment, soc.culture.usa, alt.machines.cnc,
> > alt.politics.economics, alt.energy.renewable, aus.invest,
> > comp.text.xml, alt.politics,
> > microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.windowsforms.controls,
> > sci.econ.research, Sun Microsystems, Inc.,
> > ABRAXIS BIOSCIENCE INC., Provident Energy Trust (USA), General
> > Electric Company, la.general,
> > microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet, Bank of America Corporation,
> > Crocs, Inc. and misc.writing -that last one especially amusing.
>
> He's no worse than some of the others here.
>
Whoever suggested he was? So we can add IRRELEVANT to FUCKING MORONIC.
Do go on....
> > See:
>
> >http://groups.google.com/groups/search?enc_author=Qx01ThQAAADQv2cZRYS...
>
> > Just two simple Google searches uncovered these very basic facts.
>
> You know Mark, before I (repeatedly) pointed out the remarkable
> similarities in both interests and personality between 'Ray' and
> Phil,
Some similarities, yes, but Ray is MUCH smarter than, say, you.
In fact, your dimwittedness is one of the main reasons that RL KEEPS
POSTING HERE.
He sees your horrendous mistaken identity routine as another reason to
seek amusement
here. If you'd just SHUT THE FUCK UP, He'd do the same, sooner.
Of course, the same goes for Micky Adams. Drink and drugs are his
excuse.
What's yours?
> the dullard TK was insisting he 'could not see' any whatever.
>
He's defienitely much closer to the truth than you are, then, Why is
that not surprising?
> Now we seem to have a number of posters who have independently
> asserted that 'Ray' has mimicked in one way or another some of the
> 'trademark' characteristics of Phil Innes.
Yes. We also have a number of posters who believe in God. It's
possible that some of
those believe that Genesis is literally true What, exactly, is your
point?
> Just offhand: absolute
> refusal to admit when he is clearly wrong, the frequency at which
"...with which..."..."...at which..." is clearly wrong. Admit it.
> he
> is clearly wrong, a powerful addiction to starting new threads, his
> inferiority complex, the interest in computer programming, trolling,
> etc. About the only thing missing is Phil's trusty sidekick, old
> whatshisname.
>
Ah, yes, old whatshisname...what the fuck are you trying to say?
That in your view he's similar, but that there are striking
differences?
There's more than one deranged fuck with those obsessions. Is that
really
a total shock to discover?
> > So CLEARLY, RL is ****not**** PKI. Only a complete fucking moron could
> > mistake them for being one and the same.
>
> You appear to lack the intellect to determine for certain one way
> or the other, but you certainly do NOT lack the obsessive character
> as seen in your feeble try above.
Ok, you do better then. Prove HOW it's feeble. Prove EXACTLY how you
know
FOR CERTAIN that RL is PKI.
Here's some friendly advice: when you're in a hole....stop digging.
> Having not bothered to carefully
> examine
....carefully to examine... Never split an infinitive.
> header information and the like, I can only say that if it
> were true that 'Ray' is not Phil then this poor fellow is in a truly
> sorry state,
So, you assert that you can do nothing AT ALL besides saying that if
it
were true that Ray is not Phil then RL is in a truly sorry state.
Do you really mean that? Do you mean that you can't eat and drink?
Can't watch TV? Can't go for a drive somewhere? Can't do ANYTHING
besides saying that if it were true that Ray is not Phil....etc..
etc.?
You can't even type the assertion and post it to this newsgroup?
I submit that you're wrong. Admit it. Go on.
> for he has gone around from one thread to another
> attempting to defend PI by assailing his many, many critics.
Look, shit-for-brains, RL will assail anyone if he thinks he can get a
bite.
He's an attention seeker. He's other things, too, of course.
> Of
> course 'Ray' stopped this nonsense after I gave him several tongue-
> lashings for being so clumsy.
Oh, he stopped, did he? That'll explain why he's still starting
threads here,
then.....
You're wrong. Admit it.
> Since then, I have noticed quite a
> change in 'Ray' as if he took my sound advice to heart and is now
> making a concerted effort to change his online persona -- but a
> zebra cannot truly change his stripes.
>
> > Now, FYI, the REASON why I admonish our Sam for his deranged
> > crossposting is precisely that it furnishes his ENEMIES
> > with AMMUNITION to use AGAINST HIM.
>
> Irrelevant. Sam Sloan long ago destroyed any semblance of the
> vestiges of an imitation of credibility,
Wrong.
> and so nothing his critics
> can
> do will amount to much.
So, you assert that anyone who criticises Sloan will never achieve
anything
at all in their lives? Why not? Did you put a spell on them?
> You seem to be suffering under the huge
> delusion that Sloan's 'enemies' can somehow out-do him in the way
> of undermining something which does not even exist (i.e. his
> credibility).
No, I have many shortcomings, but that is not one of them.
> This shows just how out of touch you have become.
>
It does nothing of the sort. PROVE the contrary.
> > THEREFORE, it would be better if he did not do it.
>
> I agree. However you did make a fool of yourself by claiming
> that 'mental activity of ANY kind' was not Sloan's strong suit.
Heads-up:
That was what is known as a "joke". You may have heard the term.
> In case you can't figure it out, chess is a game involving mental
> activity. In fact it mainly involves mental activity, so SS thumping
> Walter Brown was a perfect example of your tendency to go hog
> wild in overstating the facts in your typical moronic and reckless
> manner.
>
No shit, Sherlock.
> > FYI, in the immediate aftermath of the "Peter Leko is dead" fiasco, I
> > was one of only a very few people who wrote in Sloan's
> > DEFENCE (I replied to a post by Euclides Zoto). If you're too fucking
> > moronic to find it, I'll post a link.
>
> > But only if you beg me really nicely.
>
> Once again, you are demonstrating a severe misjudgement of
> reality. I couldn't care less about what you posted in the aftermath
> of the 'death' of Lepe Peko.
Another mistake then. Keep them coming.
> You are about as important to me as a
> nit, and what you write here seems fitting for such a lowly creature.
>
Clearly true. That 'splains why you've posted these two mindless
attacks
upon me. Remind me....how much time elapsed between your posting the
first and the second?
> > You're a fucking moron. In fact, calling you a fucking moron is an
> > insult to most self-respecting fucking morons.
>
> And you sir, are an uncouth, foul mouthed under-bridge dweller.
>
Yup. Welcome to Usenet. :-)
> > Why not go do something useful, like sawing off all of your fingers,
> > so you can't post any more of your BS?
>
> Maybe you should try to think up something worthwhile to say for a
> change. A GARGANTUAN change. LOL
Laugh it up. I enjoy watching you making an idiot of yourself.
Mark Houlsby
Bearing in mind that I have got NOTHING TO LOSE, and
you have SOMETHING TO LOSE, do you support his attacks on me?
Before you answer, bear in mind that both have backfired horribly.
This is true not least because he makes it look like a typical
Sam Sloan supporter is a moron who worships you (he described you
as a superstar and compared you, directly, with Fischer--was that
wise,
or dumb, do you think?).
So, the question is: Do you endorse this moron, "The Master"?
Yes or no will do.
If you don't answer, I'll take it as a "no". In that case, so should
he.
Not that he will.
samsloan
print quality is so poor that I cannot scan and post it here.
Here are some highlights of his pleading:
"35.Petitioner misrepresents my websites about other candidates or
politicians. These sites do not impersonate anyone nor do they
constitute identity theft. All of these websites identify themselves
as unofficial and not authorized by the subject."
What is at issue here is at least 6 domain names he has set up in the
names of his election opponents.
http://www.christineodonnell08.com
Two of them were originally the official campaign website of the
opponent. When the election was over, the opponent allowed the domain
name to expire and, seeing this, Warren Redlich registered it under
his own name.
Although not technically illegal, it is certainly questionable
ethically and morally.
Here is another one:
"37. Petitioner complains about 'spoof' news articles that I've
written on a website, TheSpoof.com The website is obviously satirical
fiction. For those who can't tell, each page of the site includes the
following disclaimer: 'The story above is satire or parody. It is
entirely fictitious.' The 'New York State Bar' has not cited me for
writing fiction, at least not yet."
Please note the words "at least not yet". These words are included
because in fact there is a disciplinary proceeding pending against
Warren Redlich in which these "spoof" articles are an issue. I happen
to agree with Warren Redlich that some of the articles are rather
funny, such as the Fake Diary of George W. Bush after he left office
that depicts him snorting cocaine among other things. However, a
serious issue is being made about his "MILF" articles that state that
he would like to have sexual intercourse with Janie Lynn Spears and
Bristol Palin, since both of them were under-aged minors aged 16 when
they gave birth and when the articles about them were written by
Warren Redlich.
Sam Sloan
Mark Houlsby
Sam
Why are you posting this shit to a chess newsgroup?
Do you intend to give Mr. Redlich all the help you possibly can?
If so, then it's working....
Way to go....
Mark Houlsby
None
Because he can.
Mark Houlsby
Surely there's more to it than that. Sam *can* drive his car over a
cliff edge,
but he doesn't do it.
You seem to be forgetting, Stan, that our Sam is a smooth political
operator.
Therefore, even though to you and me his actions look INCREDIBLY
FUCKING
DUMB, I presume that there's a reason behind the same.
I'd like Sam to tell us all exactly why it is that--contrary to
appearances--he is
not, in fact, a total fucking moron.
I'm genuinely curious.
Nice subject heading, BTW, you got me there... ;-)
samsloan
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Eric <eric_s...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
8. Unlike the characterizations made by Sloan, the LPNY consists
of independent members capable of making their own decisions and
subject to party bylaws and procedures. Redlich did not officially
declare until February 1, 2010.
I believe that Warren Redlich may have declared himself to be a
candidate for Governor as a Republican on that date, but I do not
recall him ever saying that he was seeking the Libertarian Nomination
for governor, then or at any other time.
If I am mistaken, please show us when and where he ever made such a
statement.
As late as April 23, 2010, I expressed my desire that all liberty-
minded individuals seeking the LPNY nomination would be welcome to
make their case at the LPNY State Convention. This was done, for
example, on the cable network show Capital Tonight, on the YNN
network. See the following clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAvEafqa2DY
9. Again, contrary to Sloan's claims (Petition ¶13), Redlich has
been a member of the LPNY since December 2009, and has the receipt to
prove it, all to Sloan's knowledge. I promoted an open and honest
dialogue about the Governor nomination from the start. Sloan's
accusations of harassing, discrediting and eliminating opponents are
disingenuous, false, and defamatory.
I have asked this question several times before and you have never
responded:
If Warren Redlich was a party member all along, why was his name NOT
on the list of party members distributed by Chris Edes by email in
March 2010?
Since you are on that email list, why did not you object at that time
that Warren Redlich was a member, if indeed he was.
Why was his name also not on the list of the members that the
credentials committee was using to check the credentials of members at
the meeting room door at the convention on April 24, 2010?
Since you admit below that you had access to the list, why did you not
complain that the name of Warren Redlich was not on the list?
Did or did not Warren Redlich pay his $25 membership dues when he
entered the convention ten minutes late on April 24, 2010? (I do not
know anybody who knows the answer to this question, so I would
sincerely like to know if you have the answer.)
10. With regard to Sloan's claims in Petition ¶18, Redlich and I
initially accepted an invitation from Mr. Lieberman for April 3, 2010
to meet in Manhattan. We were later told the meeting had been changed
to April 11. We could not attend that meeting, and Mr. Lieberman made
no accommodation for us. Nobody from the Capital District, Hudson
Valley or Greater Rochester chapters was invited or attended on April
11, 2010. Many members from those chapters did attend the LPNY
convention on April 24, 2010.
Warren Redlich and Eric Sundwall were specifically invited to attend
that meeting of April 11, 2010 so when you say that nobody from the
Capital District was invited to attend you must be stating that
neither you nor Warren Redlich are members of the Capital District
Libertarian Party, even though you live in that district.
11. Redlich had attended the annual convention for the Manhattan
LP in January 2010, where he, Sloan and Ms. Davis made presentations
and answered members' questions about their candidacies. Sloan's
claims that Redlich stated he was "assured" the nomination or that it
was "not important" that he attend events are ridiculous, and false.
As the Chairman of the Manhattan Libertarian Party has explained, he
invited Warren Redlich to give a speech at that convention on January
30 before he found out that Warren Redlich intended to become a
candidate.
Once he found out that Warren Redlich intended to become a candidate,
he did not want to renege on his invitation. He had already promised
Warren Redlich 30 minutes to speak and there was not enough time to
give the rest of us 30 minutes each to speak so we magnanimously
agreed to only a few minutes each.
What we did not realize at that time was that that would be the only
time that Libertarian Party would ever have a chance to hear Warren
Redlich speak prior to the convention on April 24. Also, Warren
Redlich gave his standard stump speech slightly modified to address
the Libertarian Party of "Ten Reasons Why I am not Qualified to be the
Libertarian Party Candidate for Governor" including "I have never been
convicted of a felony" and "I have never been married to more than one
woman at the same time". He did not take questions after the speech
but left immediately, saying he had to be someplace else, so we did
not get the chance to ask him questions such as about his proposal
that a billion dollars be spent to build a monorail line in the Albany
area.
Just about everybody there who heard the speech agreed that the speech
by Warren Redlich was very poor and one of the worst we had ever
heard.
As the convention was nearly three months away, we thought that we
would have many more chances to ask him questions and elicit his
views, but it turned out that there were none.
12. With regard to the LPNY membership list, it is true that as
the former Chair of the LPNY (2008-09), I had access to the list, but
I never used that list, nor did I provide it to anyone, nor was I
required to.
I am glad you have admitted this. Of course you had their telephone
numbers so you did not have to mail them anything.
To this day, we still do not have a membership list nor have the
minutes of the convention on April 24, 2010 ever been produced. I
would like to see a list of everybody present and voting at the
convention on April 24. As far as I am aware, no such list has been
produced. All we know is the numbers that Chris Edes wrote on the
blackboard, 27-13-4. There has been no backup or verification or
support for these numbers.
The most important thing the New York Libertarian Party ever does is
nominate its candidate for Governor once every four years. This should
have been done in a legal and proper way in accordance with Roberts
Rules of Order, and not in the slipshod way that actually occurred.
13. What Sloan does not mention is that he did, in fact, receive
and use the mailing list of the Capital District chapter of the LPNY,
which was hosting the April 24 convention. Sloan could have made, and
did not make, a similar request to the several other chapters across
the state.
This is not correct. I did not receive the mailing list of the Capital
District chapter of the LPNY. Instead the Chairman of the Capital
District scanned and emailed my mailing as an attachment. He told me
that the Capital District LPNY only has 9 members. I was shocked at
the low number. Apparently you and Warren Redlich are not members (see
above).
While Mr. Sloan makes mention of his expense so far, I've had to
give at least 2-3 hours of time to this. Not withstanding the
incalculable family loss of time, my own open market time is worth
about a hundred dollars an hour. Likewise I'm sure, Mr. Axinn, Mr.
Donoyan and Warren all command professional rates and standards. Once
this is thrown out, I'm sure our remaining time and efforts can be re-
adjusted to proper, productive use.
I am glad to learn that you make $100 an hour. Too bad I do not make
this much. If you make all this money, what do you need us for? Why
not go out and start your own party?
Had Mr. Sloan the guts to serve me in person, a comparatively
short distance from Warren's office, it would have been interesting to
note his response to my challenge for satisfaction. Having impugned my
honor and integrity I would have given him the options of first blood
or submission instead of a mortal choice. Please note the NJ has no
statutory restriction on dueling. I believe that this would also not
violate the LP pledge, in that the force or violence would not be
initiated and essentially consensual . As I can not accept the
legitimacy of court action in pursuit of dispute claims, I see no
alternative to this anarchist dilemma.
I could consider the above comment to be a physical threat, but I will
ignore that aspect of it. I am proud to state that I live in the
highest crime area of New York City, not to mention the Taliban being
after me for years, so I do not worry about such things.
However, I discovered a curious fact when I was attempting to serve
Eric Sundwall, which is you have no address other than a PO Box. That
is PO Box 503, Niverville, NY 12130-0503. That is not even your
address. It is your father's PO Box.
I even searched the court case you filed when you were kicked off the
ballot in 2006 of which you are so proud. Sundwall et al v. Kelleher
et al, 1:06-cv-01191-LEK-DRH , before Judge Lawrence E. Kahn,
presiding. There too I could find no residence address for you.
That was a poorly drawn complaint I might add. It is easily to see why
the judge dismissed it immediately only 5 days after it was filed.
Warren Redlich did a much better job in his lawsuit against the Chief
Judge of the Appellate Division Third Department. You should have used
him then.
You refused the certified mail I sent you and the post office returned
it to me and with no street address for you, so there was no way to
serve it.
Are you a registered voter? You cannot be a registered voter using
just a PO Box.
Thanks,
Eric
__._,_._
--
Sincerely,
Sam Sloan
917-507-7226
http://www.SamsOwnBooks.com/shop.aspx
Mark Houlsby
<lots of spam which, for him, was all-too-typical>
Sam
For fuck's sake you deranged shit....
STOP SPAMMING THE CHESS NEWSGROUPS.
Mark Houlsby
samsloan
wrote:
8. Unlike the characterizations made by Sloan, the LPNY consists
of independent members capable of making their own decisions and
subject to party bylaws and procedures. Redlich did not officially
declare until February 1, 2010. As late as April 23, 2010, I expressed
my desire that all liberty-minded individuals seeking the LPNY
nomination would be welcome to make their case at the LPNY State
Convention. This was done, for example, on the cable network show
Capital Tonight, on the YNN network. See the following clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAvEafqa2DY
A very good video. Thank you for giving this interview and thank you
for posting the link here.
But what you actually said was quite different. What you said at 5:26
of the 7:16 minute interview was, "The Redlich Campaign has wrapped it
up at this point."
This interview was broadcast during the evening of April 23, 2010, the
day before the Libertarian Party Convention.
The question which I and many others have asked is: How is it possible
that the Redlich Campaign had already wrapped it up, when Redlich had
done no campaigning, had mailed no campaign literature, had ignored
invitations to speak, had failed to appear at the candidates debates,
etc., and basically had done nothing, nothing at all, to secure the
Libertarian Party nomination?
Are not you frankly admitting in this interview that the convention
was rigged and there was no point and no reason for Kristin Davis or
any other candidate to attend the convention, because the outcome of
the votes and of the convention had already been decided?
Mark Houlsby
<yet more spam>
I refer the deranged, fuckwitted troll to the comments I made a few
moments ago.
jkh001
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Eric <eric_sundw...@hotmail.com>
Perhaps because a majority of the voters knew who you were? Face it,
Sam: Whether in the USCF or the larger world, the only way you have a
chance of winning anything is to hide under a rock.
None
> Perhaps because a majority of the voters knew who you were? Face it,
> Sam: Whether in the USCF or the larger world, the only way you have a
> chance of winning anything is to hide under a rock.-
Yes, then he might get the worm.