Nemo Me Impune Lacessit

Wednesday, 7 March 2012

[BTPNM] From BTP National: Briscoe Nomination Invalidated

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:07 AM (00:07)

Recently, the Boston Tea Party’s membership debated a question about invalidating the nomination of Tiffany Briscoe.

National Chair Darryl W. Perry opened a poll. The results were nine (9) votes in favor of invalidating the nomination of Briscoe, with three (3) members voting against.

As per National Chair Perry, the BTP nominee for President of the United States is now “NOTA” (“None of the Above”).

Kimberly Brighton-Barrick remains the BTP nominee for Vice-President of the United States.


NOTES

  1. Links to this post
  2. BTPNM State Committee Yahoo! Group
  3. BTPNM Yahoo! Group


Copyright © 2012 Boston Tea Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Advertisements

Friday, 27 January 2012

[BTPNM] BTP Response to the 2012 State of the Union

Filed under: Media, Philosophy, Politics — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:25 AM (00:25)

BTP Response to the 2012 State of the Union

by Darryl W. Perry, National Chairman

President Obama wants us to imagine an America that is within reach. I would rather have you imagine a world a little further down the road. The President wants “[a] country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs. A future where we’re in control of our own energy, and our security and prosperity aren’t so tied to unstable parts of the world. An economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded.”

I prefer to imagine a world in which governments allow you to educate your children as you see fit, without interference. A world in which governments allow you to start and run your own business and create jobs without interference from bureaucrats. A world where you are allowed to purchase energy from any number of sources or companies that do not have special government privilege, or supply your own energy from wind or solar and be able to share the excess with your neighbors without government regulation. A world where you are able to use the currency of your choice without threat of violating a legal tender law. Such a world would have an economy built to last, where hard work pays off, and responsibility is rewarded.

The President also said “We can either settle for a country where a shrinking number of people do really well, while a growing number of Americans barely get by. Or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules.”

If the President were serious about having an economy where everyone plays by the same set of rules; he would immediately ask Congress to revoke all government contracts, abolish the IRS, abolish the Federal Reserve which serves to protect the large banking institutions, and work with the Governors of the 50 States to abolish the use of eminent domain, abolish special privilege given to “corporations,” repeal zoning laws & abolish welfare and licensing laws which do little more than stifle the free market. A world without government interference would be a world where everyone gets a “fair shot.”

President Obama additionally said that he will “fight obstruction” in Congress. As long as bills that create more laws, continue funding the military occupation of foreign nations, take away more rights of the people and increase spending are being proposed, I believe that obstruction is the only admirable action that any member of Congress could commit.

In closing, the President says “millions of Americans who work hard and play by the rules every day deserve a government and a financial system that does the same.” I am curious what President Obama means by this statement. I doubt that he intends to remove the special privilege given to the Federal Reserve System. I doubt he will remove government contracts and privatize all government agencies. I doubt he will ask Congress to abolish the postal monopoly that prohibits competition on delivery of first class mail. I also doubt that President Obama will request the repeal of “sovereign immunity” which protects governments from civil suits when a government (or government employee) violates someone’s rights.

As long as there is a central bank (whether private or government run) there will be “phony financial profits” and “bad debt:” two things Obama says he wants to eliminate. If the President were serious about moving forward with a blueprint for an economy built to last; he would heed the advice I’ve already mentioned. The only way forward, is to remove the obstacles – placed by government at all levels – from the road.


NOTES

  1. Original article
  2. Reposted –
    1. The BTPNM Yahoo! group
  3. Links to this post


Copyright © 2012 Boston Tea Party USA and Boston Tea Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing
This blog entry created with gedit and Notepad++.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, 8 January 2012

[BTPNM] The BTPNM’s 2012 General Election Candidates

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 4:32 PM (16:32)

President of the United StatesTiffany Briscoe (Facebook)

Vice-President of the United StatesKimberly Brighton Barrack

State Representative, District 16Mike Blessing


Copyright © 2012 Boston Tea Party of New Mexico. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

Tuesday, 25 January 2011

Boston Tea Party Response to the 2011 State of the Union

Filed under: Media, Philosophy, Politics — Tags: , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 11:10 PM (23:10)

Boston Tea Party Response to the 2011 State of the Union

by Darryl W. Perry, BTPUSA National Chair

President Obama began the 2011 State of the Union address by congratulating the freshman class of the 112th Congress and asking people to be “mindful of the empty chair in this Chamber, and pray for the health of” Gabrielle Giffords. The President then mentioned the supposed “debate” between team blue and team red over the last two years saying, “that’s what a robust democracy demands.” Though, as a Constitutional law “scholar,” President Obama should know that the United States of America is supposed to be a Republic, not a democracy.

The President mentioned the recent mid-term elections saying, “governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans.” Unfortunately for the American people, the only things that will be able to get the needed bi-partisan support will not be laws that reduce the size, scope or power of the federal government. One need only look at the bi-partisan legislation passed during the Bush & Clinton administrations.

President Obama claims tax cuts were passed in December, there were no tax cuts passed by Congress or signed by President Obama in December. There was an extension of tax rates that were scheduled to expire, however there were no tax cuts passed in December.

He then went into the purpose of his speech, “winning the future.”

President Obama did not propose to “win the future” with plans to eliminate the IRS, war on drugs, legal tender laws or any other number of failed policies and agencies that have caused the condition we live in. President Obama said, “We need to out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world. We have to make America the best place on Earth to do business. We need to take responsibility for our deficit, and reform our government. That’s how our people will prosper. That’s how we’ll win the future. And tonight, I’d like to talk about how we get there.” The easiest way to make sure America is the “best place on Earth to do business” would be to eliminate the regulations and licensing laws that prevent new businesses from opening. Congress should also abolish the Federal Reserve and legal tender laws, which allow the private central bank to manipulate the money supply which causes the “boom-bust” cycle.

“The first step in winning the future,” Obama says, “is encouraging American innovation.” Though when he says “encouraging American innovation” he doesn’t mean removing subsidies that support existing business in certain industries which intentionally hinder or prevent competition. Instead of eliminating subsidies, the President called for an increase in subsidies for “biomedical research, information technology and especially clean energy technology.” Obama wants to use government force to “have 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015” and “80% of America’s electricity will come from clean energy sources by 2035.”

The President also wants to spend more taxpayer funding to replace No Child Left Behind and “prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math.”

President Obama said, “America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, and constructed the interstate highway system.” The transcontinental railroad was built by private business, electricity was originally provided by competing companies (until companies were able to get government granted monopolies) though the interstate highway system was built with taxpayer money without explicit constitutional authority to do so. He also wants to spend taxpayer funding to expand infrastructure, with a goal “to give 80% of Americans access to high-speed rail” within 25 years and within 5 years “we will make it possible for business to deploy the next generation of high-speed wireless coverage to 98% of all Americans.”

The President then mentioned the complicated tax code being enforced by the IRS and written by lobbyist and special interests. Instead of asking Congress to abolish the IRS and the income tax while reducing wasteful spending and eliminating unconstitutional spending, he asked Congress to “simplify the system” and eliminate loopholes; optimistically hoping that lobbyist will not be able to get tax breaks in the future. He also proposed a $400 billion “freeze” on spending, which amounts to not increasing spending on 12% of the federal budget.

President Obama says he has “ordered a review of government regulations. Only when we find rules that put an unnecessary burden on businesses, we will fix them. But I will not hesitate to create or enforce commonsense safeguards to protect the American people.” I hope the President keeps his word on this, though I will not hold my breath.

Obama claims the “Iraq War is coming to an end” though last August, he declared the undeclared war to be “over” while keeping 50,000 troops in Iraq. The President also warned the world, “we will not relent, we will not waver, and we will defeat you.”

President Obama’s State of the Union address on “winning the future” was nothing more than a message on spending tax payer money on central planning while giving lip service to cutting government spending and lowering federal taxes.


In Peace, Freedom, Love & Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry
Chair Boston Tea Party National Committee
Owner / Managing Editor, Free Patriot Press
2016 candidate for President of the United States of America


NOTES

  1. Original article
  2. Reposted –
    1. KCUF Media
    2. New Mexico Liberty


This blog entry created with Notepad++

Tuesday, 21 September 2010

[BTP] Re [btpnc-talk] Re [btpnc] Re Motion to endorse candidate

Filed under: Blogging / Writing, Networking, Organizing, Politics — Tags: , , — mikewb1971 @ 8:56 PM (20:56)

First Message

On 9/21/2010 4:06 PM, Jim Davidson wrote:

to endorse John Jay Myers for US House from Texas’ 32rd District

I think this is a distinctly bad idea. Have you any information to suggest that Myers endorses the platform?

He appears to favour increasing the size and scope of government at the local level. This is not consistent with the platform.

He appears to favour a major border policy that would involve at least as much size and scope as the current border. He does not indicate a desire to reduce the size and scope of government on this issue, at any level.

He does not have published positions on his web site about any number of issues. He should certainly be quizzed directly by a member of the national committee, such as Darryl who now shares a central Missouri connection with Myers.

If he endorses the platform, fine. All sorts of weird people seem to think they can do so without giving up their absurd Iron Curtain ideas.

Agreed. This seems to be part and parcel of operating a “third” or “minor” political party. I’ve seen this before with the LP as well — there are plenty of shitbirds with an axe to grind or a pet project to publicize who seek to run for office on the LP or BTP ticket.

What to do about this? I have some ideas, but I can’t release them at the moment.


Second Message

On 9/21/2010 4:47 PM, LarryT954@… wrote:

I have no problems with immigration, i have a problem with illegal immigration. That’s where the problem is. I live in a state with a dry foot, wet foot policy. I think Slick Willie( Bill Clinton) started that, because of the boat load of Haitians coming to South Florida.

Immigration, legal or illegal, is a red herring. The real problems are the welfare state and Drug Prohibition.


Copyright © 2010 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++ and KWrite.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Wednesday, 25 August 2010

BTP National Committee opposes National ID

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:51 PM (12:51)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Branson, Missouri, United States of America (Free-Press-Release.com) August 25, 2010 —

On August 24, 2010 the Boston Tea Party National Committee passed a resolution opposing a national ID “or any other bill that would establish a National ID card that includes biometric scanning or tracking devices” 5-0 (with 2 not voting).

Whereas governments that truly want to protect liberty have no need to track the every move of their citizens; and

Whereas privacy from government is a chief cornerstone of our liberties, enshrined in the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution; and

Whereas in the past, many Members of Congress, instead of taking steps to actually end our illegal immigration problem, have chosen instead to use the issue to dramatically expand government intrusion into our lives; and

Whereas the so-called “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” proposal being touted by Senators Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham includes a de facto National ID card that would be required for all U.S. citizens in order to hold a job legally; and

Whereas biometric scanning technology would be included in the card which could allow government bureaucrats to track citizens’ every move; therefore,

Be it resolved, the Boston Tea Party National Committee urges the Congress of the United States of America to vote to defeat any legislation requiring U.S. citizens to obtain a National ID card just to get a job — or any other bill that would establish a National ID card that includes biometric scanning or tracking devices.

Party Chair Darryl W. Perry writes, a national ID system would include a “National database of personal information that can be accessed by any Law Enforcement Officer and/or Fusion Center anywhere the barcode on the Driver’s License can be scanned. This database of personal information would be controlled by the very people with access, so you will have no say as to what information they keep. This could include not only your driving and/or criminal record, but could potentially include unrelated information such as your medical records, library records and any other host of information that some bureaucrat deems ‘necessary’. Voting history perhaps? How about party affiliation?”

Plank 4 of the 2006 program of the BTP reads “The Boston Tea Party calls for the immediate repeal of the REAL ID Act and any and all National ID plans.” Perry adds, “it only takes two more steps to become Germany’s Third Reich, ‘Where are your papers? Your papers, please!'”

The Boston Tea Party was founded in 2006 with a one sentence platform, “The Boston Tea Party supports reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose.” In October 2008, the party’s National convention adopted the four point program of the Campaign for Liberty. Their program calls for an end to overseas occupation, a restoration of privacy and other liberties, no increase in the national debt, and a thorough review of the Federal Reserve. During the 2010 convention the Party adopted a new program to End the Wars of Aggression, End the Fed, End the War on Drugs, End the Abuses of Liberty, End the Immigration Fiasco.

For more information, contact Darryl W. Perry


NOTES

  1. Original posting
  2. Reposted —
    1. Personal blogs — Xanga
    2. KCUF Media — Blogspot / Xanga
    3. New Mexico Liberty / Mike Blessing for State Representative / The BTPNM Blog

Copyright © 2010 Boston Tea Party USA and Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Friday, 14 May 2010

ABQ Journal Questionnaire for Legislature Candidates [1]

Filed under: Life, Politics, Quizzes / Surveys — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 10:54 AM (10:54)

Political PartyLibertarian Party / Boston Tea Party

Place of Residence — West Side of Albuquerque

Age — 39

Education — Currently a student at CNM, going for a degree in photonics

Occupationsee here

Political / Government Experiencesee here for the full list

Highlights —

  • Boston Tea Party NM State Chair — 1998 — present, National Vice Chair 2009 — present
  • Libertarian Party, Vice Chair — 1997-2001, Secretary, 2005-2009, Editor, New Mexico Liberty, 2003 — present
  • US / NM Army National Guard, Alpha Battery, 7/200 Air Defense Artillery — 1994-1998
  • US Army Reserve, 157th Separate Infantry Brigade (Mechanized) — 1991-1994
  • US Army ROTC at Penn State University, Abington Campaus — 1989-1992

Major Professional Accomplishment — Ten years as camera technician for New Mexico’s Consumer Advocate and on-screen talent for The Weekly Sedition on Comcast Channel 27.

Major Personal Accomplishment — I’ll wait til much later in life before selecting any one event in my life as “pivotal.”

  1. In dealing with state government revenue downturns, would you generally favor additional spending cuts and government efficiency or tax and fee increases?

    I would favor additional spending cuts and greater efficiency, as well as holding the line on creating new spending programs.

  2. Would you support or oppose a New Mexico law recognizing domestic partnerships that would grant same-sex couples most of the same rights afforded to heterosexual couples?

    Inasmuch as the State requires any consenting adult to get a permission slip (“marriage license”) from the State to enter into any sort of formal relationship with any other consenting adult, I support full equality across the board for everyone in this matter, regardless of sexual orientation. I don’t see any reason that LGBTQ people should have to put up with different standards in the legal sense than the heterosexual crowd.

    That being said, I don’t see any reason why anyone (LGBTQ, hetero or whatever) should have to go to a government official for permission to enter a relationship with another person. Those who want government out of their wallets, businesses and gun cabinets shouldn’t have any problem kicking the State out of the bedroom. Nor does it make any sense to support government involvement in other people’s relationships. Thus, I would work to get the State out of the marriage-license and -definition business entirely, by repealing the law(s) requiring people to get a “marriage license” before declaring themselves “married.”

  3. What should the Legislature do to ensure that New Mexico’s pension plans remain solvent?

    I don’t know that the public pension plans are actually solvent at this time — see this study sponsored by the Rio Grande Foundation that says those plans are currently somewhere between Ø8,300,000,000 and Ø22,900,000,000 IN THE REDThe Government “Gravy Train”: An Analysis of New Mexico’s Private versus Public Sector Employment and Compensation.

    Part of the problem is the defined-benefit system currently used by the State, where public employees are promised a specific amount of cash to be disbursed when the pension is cashed out. Replacing this with a defined-contribution system such as 401(k)s or mutual funds will partially fix the problem.

    But the best solution to the State pension insolvency is to STOP expanding the State — QUIT creating new agencies for every problem, real and imagined. Check first to see if there’s an existing agency that can do the job. Ask if the problem is one that should be properly addressed by the State, and not by the private sector.

  4. What should be done to improve New Mexico public school perfomance and student achievement?

    I would first make parents fully responsible for the full cost of each child’s public education, by sending them a bill for that cost at the end of the school year. This would cause them to develop an interest in what the kid(s) are learning, if for no other reason than to see where their money is going, and what result they’re getting for the expenditure.

    Next, I would support ending the compulsory attendance and enrollment laws, along with ending the restrictions upon homeschoolers.

  5. Do you support or oppose the “pit rule” on oil and gas drilling in its current form?

    At the very least, I would seek to amend the pit rule make New Mexico’s version closer to that of Texas. Think about it — every drop of oil spilled on the ground is a drop that can’t be converted to gasoline, motor oil or other usable, salable products. Every drop spilled is a loss off the bottom end for the drilling company.

  6. Would you support or oppose the State Environment Department’s establishment of a “cap and trade” regulation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

    Considering Climategate and related scares (see global cooling), I think that those currently ensconsed on the NM Environmental Improvement Board should recuse themselves from further interference in the private-sector economy. I will vote against further restrictions on the private sector, and will sponsor a “precautionary” rule requiring a regulatory impact statement detailing how any new laws will affect the private sector.

  7. Would you support or oppose a new state law requiring mandatory jail time for first-time DWI offenders?

    How about liberalizing the liquor license laws so that we can have a bar on every street corner, like Texas has? That way people who drink too much wouldn’t have to drive, as they could just walk home.

  8. Have you or your business, if you are a business owner, ever been the subject of any state or federal tax liens?

    No — I’m guessing this disqualifies me for the spot of U.S. Treasury Secretary.

  9. Have you ever been involved in a personal or business bankruptcy proceeding?

    No.

  10. Have you ever been arrested for, charged with, or convicted of drunken driving, any misdemeanor or felony in New Mexico or any other state?

    My crimes against humanity


NOTES

  1. Reposted —
    1. Personal blogs — Myspace / New Mexico Liberty / Blogspot / WordPress / Tumblr
    2. KCUF Media — Myspace / Xanga / Blogspot

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Wednesday, 31 December 2008

BTP vs. “Modern Whigs” ?

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , — mikewb1971 @ 12:04 AM (00:04)

Current mood: amused, intimidated (not really)

It seems that the Boston Tea Party has drawn the attention and ire of the Virgnia state affiliate of the “Modern Whig Party.”

Oh, wow, I am so . . . terrified. No, not really. I mean, come on, don’t these clowns have anything better to do with their time than attempt to whale away on another “third” party? Maybe someday they’ll get a clue and realize that all they’re doing is giving the BTP some no-cost publicity.

About the “Modern Whigs” — they’re a bunch of disaffected Republicans and Democrats attempting to unseat the Reps and Dems from their positions of power . . .  using planks cherry-picked from the Democrat and Republican platforms, mish-moshed together.

From the MWP’s national site —

The Modern Whig Party relies on common sense. The organization is the fastest-growing advocate for such issues as fiscal responsibility, strong national defense and bold social progression. We see the value of independent thinking and the danger of being limited to one distinct ideology. Since 1833, we have carried the mantle of America’s middle-of-the-road party.

That’s their distinction from the Democrats and Republicans?! The idea that they’re the “middle-of-the-road” group? What’s so special about that? Anyone can be “middle-of-the-road,” just that being so tends to get you run over by oncoming traffic from either side of that road. I suspect that being “middle-of-the-road” isn’t going to win them any elections, considering the way that the Democrats and Republicans have divided up the nation into competing fiefdoms and jealously guard their holds on the reins of power over everyone else.

I note that some in the BTP are worried about this hostile attention from the Virginia Whigs.

What sparked the ire of the Virginia Whigs was a comment by BTP refounder Jim Davidson in his BTP blog posting “In case they kill me for it”

Members of the Modern Whig party are apparently upset with me for my comments on this thread:

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2008/12/update-from-the-modern-whig-party/

In particular these statements:

I find it difficult to care about unit designations and battle ribbons. My proposal would be to stop sending American troops to other countries to massacre their children and rape their women. Then there would be less need for these unit designations and campaign ribbons.

The Virginia Whigs also took exception to the next paragraph in Jim’s posting —

For their next trick, the Modern Whigs will demand campaign ribbons for DEA agents and other para military agency troopers involved in overseas suppression of trade and commerce in drugs.

by saying that “Davidson went on to malign individual DEA agents as paramilitary troopers.”

What’s wrong with that? I’ll go a step further and lump them in with the F-Troop, in that their very presence in American society should be considered an occupation of America like that of the German Schutzstaffel or the Russian Komitjet Gosudarstvjennoj Bjezopasnosti across Europe. The only real difference between the SS, KGB and the DEA and F-Troop isn’t one of operating philosophy or committment to doing the right thing on the parts of DEA and F-Troop, but of severity.

And if that wasn’t funny enough, apparently the Virginia Whigs have been told to “tone it down” by their party’s national executives. Ha ha ha — that’s a good one there — members of “America’s ‘middle of the road’ party” are getting too rambunctious for the tastes of their national executives!

Wednesday, 24 December 2008

Nominated for BTP Vice-Chair Spot

Filed under: Networking, Organizing, Politics — Tags: , — mikewb1971 @ 10:57 PM (22:57)

Current mood: Cool, stunned

On Monday, I was rather surprised to learn that I had been nominated for the vice-Chair spot of the Boston Tea Party.

I was a little surprised to find out that I’ve been nominated, and while I have accepted the nomination to be a candidate, I’d be OK with it if my opponent, Kent McManigal, won the race.

UPDATEHere’s the actual poll to fill the vacant spot.

Thursday, 7 August 2008

Stanhope for President 2012

Filed under: Networking, Politics — Tags: , , , , , , — mikewb1971 @ 6:45 PM (18:45)

Just recently, I was reading Tom Knapp’s blog and found this post – Reconsidering Stanhope.

I had first heard of Doug Stanhope when his potential candidacy was stumped for on the [Libertarian2008] Yahoo!  group, by of all people, Eric “the Shake” Dondero. This was back in the middle of 2006.

Eric was saying that the LP should nominate Stanhope because Doug had some name recognition. Since name recognition seems to be Shake Dondero’s ONLY criterion when supporting LP candidates, I was initially dismissive of the idea. Still, I was intrigued enough to look him up on the net, and found an interview that Doug had did with the now-defunct hammeroftruth.com. It was great stuff – this wasn’t another Russell Means shopping for a nomination in the hopes of getting some “free” TV time and then absconding with the campaign treasury. Doug addressed the issues raised very well, and showed a fresh take on those issues. One of the issues raised was “9-11” (the 11 Sept 2001 attacks), and he managed to talk about it without coming across either as a nut or a lamestreamer. When hammeroftruth.com took a dirt-nap, that interview went with it. Doug had copies posted to his Myspace pages, but those seem to have been taken down as well. Which really sucks, as it was a great interview.

A few months later, the candidates for the LP’s presidential nomination were asked some questions, and the answers were posted in the pages of the print edition of LP News. One of the questions was What makes you uniquely qualified to be president? As the other candidates cited various credentials, Stanhope’s answer went like this –

No one is uniquely qualified to be president. Beware the person who claims to be.

That comment right there told me that Stanhope was the best candidate for the nomination. Of all the available people, he “got it” the most.

Fast-forward to January 2007 – Doug’s comedy tour came to Albuquerque’s Guild Cinema on 21 January 2007. His routine was very close to what you see on his No Refunds DVD. Afterwards, I met with Stanhope outside the Guild, and we crossed Central Ave to Kellys Brewpub. While there, he told me about his campaign ideas – bringing up prison reform, for example. I told him that I thought he would be a great candidate, but he didn’t seem as confident.

In March, 2007, Doug said that in May, a big announcement was forthcoming. On 1 May 2007, the announcement was released. The content of it was that Doug was dropping out of the race, as the path he wanted to take (using his comedy tour as a campaign venue) was outlawed by the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act of 2002. Which was a disappointment, but understandable.


NOTES

  1. Reposted –
    1. KCUF Media – Xanga

Copyright © 2008 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Older Posts »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: