While New Hampshire citizens managed to shoo carpet-bagger Scott Brown out of the state and return Democrat Jeanne Shaheen to the Senate and Annie Kuster back to the House on the national level, Democrats have had some losses, mostly in the state house as extremist libertarians along with some extremist Tea Partiers gained control. Some of the traditionally more reasonable Republicans did ride on the GOP slide such as Gene Chandler who Bill O’Brien replaced as house speaker in the 2010 Tea Party sweep.
But we’re not here to focus on moderates, we’d rather keep you updated on the people to watch closely this upcoming session, in particular those with extremist, anarcho-capitalists views and ambitions. We’re speaking of course of the self described Free Staters (read more indepth about them here) that have professed to come and destroy state government, break New Hampshire from the union and create their own libertarian paradise, whether the rest of the New Hampshire citizens want it or not.
Its important to note that New Hampshire has the largest legislative body in the country with 424 members. State house members, of which there are 400 must fight for their seat every two years, the state senators makeup the remaining 24. The term pay is a total $100 dollars a year, plus transportation expense. As a result the party leadership on either side prefers to spend their time and energy on the more lucrative senate seats leaving most state reps to fend for themselves. This creates a window of opportunity for all kinds of regular folks to run as long as they’ve got the time and money to spend running a campaign and running back and forth to the state house during session time. Those last qualifications tend to weed out the herd so to speak, leaving most often only the self employed, those who have a source of sustenance beyond trading their time and hard labor for cash and the retired. There’s an old saying about who runs in New Hampshire, “The three r’s: the rich, the retired and the —” since the last is not so polite we’ll leave that for you to figure out.
Therefore, it was only a matter of time that the adherents to the mission of “Free Stater” takeover would figure out that possibly dismantling from inside might be pretty easy. At least the first part; getting elected. Traditionally, because the districts which break down into wards in larger areas are so numerous, most regular people just don’t pay a whole lot of attention to who is on the ticket. With two or three or even as many as seven seats available for their region, voters will often vote the party ticket they like and be done with it. This has resulted traditionally in all sorts of odd characters getting elected often to the later humiliation of the party they are supposed to represent.
But in the case of the Free Staters; they aren’t people on a personal political mission or tangent or people running to protect a pet area of government regulation or grind a particular ax; the Free Staters are on a greater mission and are organized and committed. As a result we’ve seen a gradual trickle of Free Stater followers and believers run in campaigns, usually as Republicans. Democratic wards, particularly those in the larger cities such as Manchester and Nashua, tend to have a diverse population of people who traditionally vote Democratic, whether because of old union sympathies or ethnic differences. They will tend to vote the ticket even if they haven’t had the chance to pay attention as much. Why not? Makes sense, if you are pro-labor you know Republicans aren’t. If you want a candidate who will vote for programs that help poor or elderly people, you’d vote Democratic, Republicans don’t profess to care about poor people or the elderly.
So Free Staters have figured out the shotgun approach is best. If all you want to do is get in, no matter how then why not run as a Democrat, especially in wards that typically vote Democratic but may be more socially disenfranchised and may not personally know or even have heard of their house rep or senator. So running as a Democrat has been the Free Stater practice now for at least the last two sessions. As shown here, its a strategy that they refuse to give up on even though this second try shows only one success with that strategy.
So without further ado, here’s the list, with the party they ran under also noted and the history (thanks to Granite State Progress for their work on this) of those who have served in the house before linked to their names. We considered putting pictures to the names, but we’re not here to promote these people or their version of libertarianism.
Glen Aldrich (R) – Belknap District 2
Mike Sylvia (R) – Belknap District 6
Ed Comeau (R) – Carroll District 5
Robert Hull (R) – Grafton District 9
Keith Murphy (R) – Hillsborough District 7
Elizabeth Edwards (D) – Hillsborough District 11
Amanda Boutin (D) – Hillsborough District 11
Keith Ammon (R) – Hillsborough District 40
Brian Seaworth (R) – Merrimack District 20
Dan McGuire (R) – Merrimack District 21
Carol McGuire (R) – Merrimack District 29
Jason Osborne (R) – Rockingham District 4
Shem Kellogg (R) – Rockingham District 14
Adam Schroadter (R) – Rockingham District 17
Max Abramson (R) – Rockingham District 20
Laura Jones (R) – Stafford District 24
Like many young libertarians, Edwards has said to some she found a home within the FSP for her sexual orientation freedom. Really? The Democrats have no history of working for and defending LGBT rights? More than likely its that extremist libertarianism might be more appealing to someone who spent some time as an intern at the Koch Brothers’ founded Cato Institute. A part of the obstructive factor of the efforts at forming an Occupy in New Hampshire, Edwards once seemed near an emotional breakdown during an informational presentation about the Koch Brothers corporate web of power, protesting that it was “one-sided” and unfair. What’s interesting to note, besides the one Free Stater, Elizabeth Edwards, the rest that won ran were Republicans, so hopefully people did actually pay attention to some extent.
We did find Elizabeth Edwards at the polling place doing her obligatory visibility; only trouble was, she was standing with the Republicans rather than with the Democrats. When asked why she hesitated and then replied, “Well we can be everywhere.” which is true, the candidates and their supporters can stand anywhere. But Elizabeth obviously felt more comfortable standing with the Republicans and Tea Party extremists and two of the Free Staters (that lost their bid, Eileen Landies and Tim O’Flaherty). Too bad for Eileen and Tim since they did have a chance to show their colors last session. Guess that was enough for the voters in Manchester.
O’Flaherty immigrated to New Hampshire as a converted Free Stater with the sole intention of running as a Democrat to get into the heart of the political process and begin the mandatory deconstruction. He was quoted during his time in office as saying he “hated serving” because he hated government. He hated it so much he decided to ask for another term. It was also observed that although he ran as a Democrat he regularly caucused with Republicans. For a group of anarchists its really quite something that they consider it worth stretching their anarchist tent enough to allow some establishment Republicans in who seem to have no problem finding ways to increase government. Apparently government isn’t such a problem after all when its used to disenfranchise voters, keep women from exercising their rights to reproductive healthcare and to allow corporations a free ride on the public’s dollar.
Unfortunately the Republicans they caucused with last term didn’t seem to be in on their plan to dismantle government and despite their best efforts, last we knew, its still in place ready for a new term of serious civic government peppered with shenanigans of the likes of these folks. We’ll be watching and reporting. Stay tuned.
Ok, sorry, I like your information, but really, you need to be correct. Senators also run for two year terms. Not four, as your article states. Nor does the Governor. two years. Moving, on, thanks for the info about the FSP an its minions.
Thanks for the correction, fixed.
Get a clue – what state are you from?
If you had a clue you’d know.
In Ward 7 Nashua 2012 Free Stater Michael Garcia ran as a Dem and was elected blindly by his constituents who believed he was truthful about his “Democratic” history of voting as a “Democrat”- Garcia is no Democrat. Garcia moved from Florida to Keene where he was elected then decided the commute to Concord was too far from Keene, so he moved his family to Nashua. Nashua Democrats became increasingly aware of Garcia’s Republican voting record voting against equal pay and against minimum wage. He was endorsed by the Liberty Alliance and scored an 88% with the Republican House Party. During the primary the ward 7 Democrats outed Garcia publicly by sharing with voters his voting record. Garcia also stood not with his fellow “Democrats” but alongside the Republican candidates, Garcia did not not win in the election and barely passed the primary; once voters were aware they reacted strongly against extreme misrepresentation. The other communities that elected Free State “Democrats” need to do the same awareness and outreach to voters. Otherwise we see our entire NH state government dismantled by anarchist infiltrators who have no interest in upholding the freedoms of others, only of their own libertarian agendas.
Well said, Eunice! No one likes a LIAR, do they? So much for that “strategy.” You can fool most people once, but shame on anyone who thinks they are smarter than everyone and tries again! Silly man!
Interesting that you say “… anarchist infiltrators who have no interest in upholding the freedoms of others, only of their own libertarian agendas”, when the ENTIRE libertarian agenda is to uphold the freedom of everyone.
Sure, the freedoms of everyone that live within the narrow paradigm that the libertarian defines. That is, those who own property, which is about the only value that libertarians have; that and the acquisition of capital, which actually is just more property, in fact everything is defined merely as property to the libertarian. This leads to all sorts of moral contortions which one the libertarian saints, Murray Rothbard eloquently brings out when he advocates for the lack of any moral code at all and even ponders the possibility that children are nothing more than property and thus parents should have the right to do with them as they please, even to beat them, molest them or starve them. Its just property.
So the propertyless, the powerless and the disenfranchised from the capitalist paradise envisioned by the libertarian isn’t worth bothering with and is free to be exploited and attempt to eak out an existence or just simply go off and die. Which most interestingly, as history shows, most exploited peoples end up dying anyway.
But I realize, only losers are on the other side and those that somehow deserve to not live a decent life and thus goes the weakness of those of us with moral values of some modicum beyond the accumulation of wealth and the said extraction of such from any resource possible without the acknowledgment that such, including human resources, are precious and more valuable as a tool for peaceful living and happiness when worked with in a wholistic and unified manner rather in a linear, one-sided primitive model of exploitation. (Actually the use of the word primitive here may be inappropriate since most non human life forms on this planet survive through a very balanced system of conservation).
Well you’ve been doing this for years. You just got an extremist democrat in as a republican in Bedford
You are you talking to? We didn’t do anything to get a Democrat anywhere. That’s not our job, we just tell the story. Go tell the Democrats about what they do.
And pray tell, what is an “extremist” Democrat? Someone who believes government should guarantee clean water for its citizens? The term “extreme” when talking about a Democrat is really laughable. Tell us more jokes.
You missed a whole lot of names in that list
Yes Denis, I’m sure we did, its a work in progress that will grow or shrink accordingly and so many refuse to ‘admit’ that they have anything to do with the Free State Project. But that’s ok, we’re watching along with many other people and will keep it updated. Anyone who wishes to submit additions or corrections, please feel free to do so.
I’m impressed. Thank you for compiling all this.
You missed some names but had a few on the list that are wrong. Please fix your list. Tammy Simmons, Lydia Harmon and Eileen Landies are not a Free Staters.
Tammy Simmons is not on the list nor is Lydia Harmon. Eileen Landies has expressed enough Free State sympathies to live on the list of honorable members, but she is not on the list either, especially since she didn’t win, which is noted.
Tammy Simmons also deserves mention as an honorable or supporting member of the Free Staters since she too spouts a lot of their same theories and its hard to believe that she doesn’t support her openly Free Stater paramour, Dan Garthwaite. who lost as well and thus didn’t make the list we posted here.
LOL. This article is riddled with errors. The way it reads… Well.. You can tell the author spent way too much time in leftist union controlled schools. Wow. Maybe blogging isn’t your thing.
Call away on those errors please, enlighten us. “Leftist union controlled schools”
Where did you go to school?
ah. so you don’t approve my comment calling out your errors.
We have lives and many of us have to work for a living we don’t just “live free”, someone has to pay the bills. We get to the comment section as quickly as we can. Thanks anyway for your support.
Wow, this is the definition of “Cognitive Dissonance”…best example I’ve seen in a while.
Explain please Adam, help yourself.
[…] is more than half of those who made it past their primaries, and a new record. I can also say that this list is both wrong and too short (warning: click link only if you have a strong stomach for paranoia […]
“Really? The Democrats have no history of working for and defending LGBT rights?”
Really? You think Democrats have some kind of monopoly on defending rights? I will tell you this, Democrats have a poor track record in defending individual rights. I hear Democrats constantly boast that they are the defenders of minorities, but the individual is the smallest minority of all. The fact that you talk about rights in terms of specific groups shows how flawed your collectivist ideology is. Rights are universal. But apparently such ideals are too “extreme” for your tastes, and that is why you loose ground libertarians and anarchists.
Its really awesome to have never been a part of a socially marginalized group isn’t it? You are just a racist dressed in new clothes, nice dress. The libertarians and anarchists you speak of are but a small, offbeat American sector of what really is a long socialist tradition. You are anarch-capitalists. Own it. You believe there is no oppression, or anyway, any oppression you want to see or any oppression you’ve ever understood. Your state-less dream has no room for direct control, no room for social existence, just room for a Darwinian world where the vicious will eat their own lamb, where the ignorant and the most vile natures of humans exist.
The only rights anarcho-capitalists care about are the rights no further than their own nose. To paraphrase others, followers of this particular strange religion believe in their personal flawlessness and superiority over everything not them.
Wow, way to go on completely missing the point. Racism is the extreme end of collectivist ideologies, and libertarians and anarchists are at the opposite end of that spectrum. Focusing on individual rights universalizes the expansion of rights for everyone. By creating a definition of rights that only applies to specific groups you are in fact closer to being a racist than any of us. How sad.
Very sad for you that you failed to learn or simply ignore history entirely and the way in which society has been constructed. Unless and until the systems that allow for the oppression of certain groups is deconstructed, the oppression will continue. To claim that its the fault of the groups themselves who wish to deconstruct the oppression they suffer, for that very systemic suffering is bullshit on its face. I’d like to see how you explain the history of slavery and the systemic social oppression that allowed it to exist using your “individuals only” argument. The fact is, like most all anarcho-capitalist philosophy, your view of individualism over the behavior of humans to group themselves together for collective power over other groups really denies history.
In fact its capitalism itself and the greed of the accumulation of capital among a small number of elites who feel they have the divine right by some logic they make on their own (insert capitalist libertarians) to justify the exploitation of masses of people in order to accumulate capital for themselves. This also applies to creating wars and divisions and even false rivalries and jealousies in order to gain easy access to natural and human resources.
Much of this article is wrong. Names misspelled really poor reporting.
The names were those published in public media. They were candidates for public office, you’d think they’d get their names right. Not our problem.
What did you expect to happen when the duopoly of political parties acts like a fascist state putting into place draconian ballot access laws? Libertarians that identify more closely with Democrats will run as Democrats and Libertarians who identify more closely with Republicans will run as Republicans. If you want Libertarians to run as Libertarians give them ballot access as Libertarians. How can anyone keep a straight face and say that these ballot access laws foster free open and fair elections?
Then do something to change that but that’s not the point here, the candidates that ran as Democrats lied about what they were and who they were and what they represented. Also, anarcho-capitalists have no alignment in values with Democrats save for corporatist-centrist Democrats, who were it not for the fascist movement of the Republicans would be Republicans.
Libertarians traditionally have always supported social responsibility as one of the key values of libertarianism. The American capitalist construct carved out the cloth of monarchist teat-suckers like Edwin Von Mises or complete psychopathic nutjobs like Murray Rothbard or Ayn Rand have no moral constraint or responsibility and are proud of it.
There’s no room for that with the core principles of progressive Democrats or traditional libertarians.
please fix Ed Comeau’s last name. Also, proofread before posting things.
We do our best, thanks for the correction.
Just more statist religious dogma… these government religion/cult members really are brainwashed into the initiation of violence. They can’t even see that the state can’t survive without terrorism…
You sound very much like a cult member yourself, typical of most that follow the religion of Ayn Rand.
Free Staters don’t care about the poor! They want your grandmother to die in the street!
[Editor’s comment: Mr. Kemp, we do not allow the promotion of Free Stater or libertarian pamphlets, books or propaganda here. We’ll let your effort at irony stand though, since the exclamations are in fact true.]
Readers: In reference to above, please recall Ron Paul’s debate tour and the “Die! Die!” exclamation from his supporters in regards to full time R. Paul campaign staffer who had cancer and had was provided no health insurance by the campaign. Take away: Yes, they do want grandma to die in the street.
You sad, ugly, vicious people. It is no coincidence that leftist statism killed millions of people in the 20th century. “Progressives” have become counterrevolutionary reactionaries. No thank you, but thank goodness for the Free State Project and its activists.
Oh Mr. Condon, from whence do you write? From your law firm in Florida where you attempted to conduct your campaign and pretend you were a citizen of New Hampshire? The real issue starts with the intellectual honesty of the Free Staters and since its evident that even the simplest acts of integrity are a struggle for your ‘movement’, it seems rather clear that everything else you say is a slippery slope from there.
I notice you don’t mention the millions of people killed by your regressive leftist ideology in the 20th century. I wouldn’t either if I were part of such a movement.
Perhaps you can help us Mr. Condon and name them yourself. I’m sure the ideology of humane public policy that embraces the concepts of justice, peace and freedom are killing people so much that you’ll be able to provide us all with dozens of examples. Please, we’re waiting with anxious anticipation.
Oh and hope you had a merry Christmas, you know, love, light and peace on earth and all those leftie ideas.
Right on, Tim Condon! We should all thank goodness for Chris Cantwell, Bill Bochynski, Darryl W. Perry, and all of the other Free Staters who advocate violence as a way of taking over. We are grateful to you for Free State pledge signers like Vin Suprynowiscz who wrote a book attempting to turn mass murderer Carl Drega into a hero. For bringing us Muni Savyon, an abuser, who murdered his son and then killed himself.
We thank goodness that you’ve brought us the Free Keeners, who harass city employees, deface military monuments, and we especially thank you for bringing their leader, Ian Bernard, a disturbed individual that thinks there should be no legal age of consent for adults having sex with children.
You’ve brought us so many things to be grateful for.
“Progressives” always claim they’ll provide “justice, peace and freedom,” if only people will give them the power to make it happen. Here are some in the 20th century, all socialists, who managed to get into power: Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, and Fidel Castro. All were and are dictators and murderers. That’s the ultimate result of socialism (aka statism), sooner or later.
You are a liar, a coward and your bigotry is astounding. Not everyone who is a Free Stater is an anarchist, a capitalist or right wing. You CAN be BOTH a Free Stater AND a Democrat.
The Free State Project is made up of strangers. We signed a letter of intent to move to NH and exert our “fullest practical effort.” For some people, their fullest practical effort is opening businesses. For some, it is running for office. For some, it is just living here. And yes, for some, it is causing a bit of a ruckus in places like Keene.
A Free Stater is a person who sees how corrupt government is and wants to fix it. You see how corrupt government is and you want to give it more power. And you, you are as corrupt as the government. You worship government. That is what you really despise about the Free State Project as far as I can tell. I have watched your hatred for 3 years. I have been personally impacted by your deceit and bigotry.
I do not condone the thoughts and actions of every person who has moved here. I am not a capitalist. I am an anarchist who lives in the real world. I believe people know the difference between right and wrong and that a law doesn’t help me with that.
Elizabeth Edwards NEVER lied about being a Free State Project mover. In fact, she was very open about it.
I am a Free Stater. I will not hide it and I will call out your bigotry for what it is, every single time I see it. You do not believe in equality. You believe what you think is right is the ONLY thing that is right. I am not your stereotype and neither are most Free State Project participants.
Oh, one more fact that might be useful here. The Free State Project does not condone violence or bigotry. That is why Chris Cantwell was banned. But, if you are going to claim ideological purity, you ought to look in the mirror. Your own party is full of criminals…both are.
Elizabeth Edwards did in fact deceive voters by pretending to be a part of a party that she is not.
Free Staters are not the end-all and be-all of anarchist thought, unlike their pretense or belief.
Anarchism that supports capitalism is exactly what the Free Staters support.
Anti-government does not mean no government nor does it mean anything really. Its a canard that is getting old and that makes no sense in the real world. Hate government? Blame yourself. The tools for participation exist but instead of participation what your group proposes is not only dropping out but also condoning, allowing and ignoring the power of corporations and capitalists to gain control of the people.
Without some mechanism to represent the people’s interests, the people will be over powered, as they are increasingly in the United States, by corporate interests.
Getting “money out of politics” or slamming on Monsanto are all well and good but these issues have no existed in a vacuum. The entire structure and history of this country is one of elitist control of the people. And yet you embrace a religion that supposedly wants to “get back our liberty like the founders intended”.
Sorry, but what most of the founders intended wasn’t even close to what we have today, it was far more oppressive and the gains we’ve made have only come out of progressive action. Not pro-corporatists reactinaryism.
Stop denying the existance of systemic oppression, stop denying the existence of long reaching corporate power over our messaging and lives, stop denying the need for a civic body to stand as the wall between domination by the few and powerful and the people’s interests.
The way you people talk you’d think that environmental protections, labor protections, civil rights and the rest were given to Americans by the powerful as some kind of paternal gifts.
Study your history.
You are ignorant. You make assumptions about me as though you know who I am or I believe.
Stop denying the existance of systemic oppression, I don’t deny the existence of systemic oppression. The system doing the oppression IS government.
stop denying the existence of long reaching corporate power over our messaging and lives,
I don’t deny the existence. Good Lord, you are ignorant if you think I am not acutely aware of the effect of this.
stop denying the need for a civic body to stand as the wall between domination by the few and powerful and the people’s interests.
The civic body I believe in involves more bodies and voices than yours.
How about this, You stop telling me what I need to do.
This is what you want. You want the power of whoever is elected to be used against whoever they want. With Democracy, this is what you get. But you complain when it isn’t your people in office. Doesn’t that tell you something about the system?
Libertarians, Anarcho-capitalists don’t want anyone to be able to wield the power of force without retaliation aka the state.
And you seem to think gays owe Democrats something. Gays do not owe something to a party who would use force against others in making them accept gays. Freedom loving gay people understand that if we don’t want the force of government used against us (as it so often has been in the past, thus the warranted distrust), then we should not use it against others to force them to bake us cakes and hold our ceremonies.
Firstly, we’ll assume that your reference to “bake us cakes” has to do with the case of an owner of a small bakery in Colorado that backed out of a wedding cake order when he realized it was for a gay couple. Its hard to tell what portion of the gay community you portend to speak for but if discrimination is your bag, hey don’t let anyone get in your way. But the majority of people would rather receive the same respectful treatment that anyone else gets when carrying on their daily business. Most of the gay community thought so, along with all of the progressive community not only in Colorado but countrywide. Then it turns out the courts thought so as well.
Again if you think getting locked out of opportunities because you aren’t quite like the dominant mainstream, or don’t fit into someone’s narrow view of the world is all that you can always just shut yourself out of opportunities on your own. Its a free world afterall and if you love being hated then hate yourself all you want. Keep yourself hidden, keep yourself alone, call yourself names, hey whatever gives you your kicks.
But don’t pretend to speak for the rest of any community when you say that that community would rather suffer the same everyday out in the community.
Also, don’t equate narrow-minded prejudice and ignorance with democracy or justice; it isn’t. Its just plain old ignorance, superstition and prejudice, something progressives work hard everyday against.
Anarcho-capitalists are suckers, tools for the corporatocracy. No one has any problem with you practicing your economic philosophy, all we ask in New Hampshire is that you carve that out of your own hands instead of glomming onto a society that’s already been built for over 200 years by the laws of the land.
Thanks for playing.
Please be factual. There is nothing but propaganda in this blog and leave the Koch brothers alone. Corrupt labor unions give far more to support Democrats then they do to support Republicans.
A. Labor unions aren’t anymore corrupt than any other human run organization and they actually do more good than any of their past issues have done damage. They created the middle class in this country, gave people the 8 hour day, fought for workman’s comp, fought for the Labor Standards Act, fought for on the job safety and generally fought for all the rights and comforts that working people have ever had in this country.
Now whether or not people enjoy those labor rights and comforts that labor fought for them today is another story. When people like you disparage unions and grant favor to those who’d have workers making no more than what could afford a box under a bridge, then what do you want?
B. I’m sure the Koch Brothers would be please to know that you are defending their honor, but frankly, they don’t care about you or anyone else among the regular folks. What we’d like is to understand what it is that the powerful have over people like you. They wish to destroy our democracy and have us all as their penniless servants, but people like you would starve yourselves to get a chance to lick their boots. What is that?
C. Yes, labor supports Democrats because historically Democrats support the worker. That’s simple. Republicans have worked hard to defend the interests of big business over the interest of regular folks like us and like you. Very easy to understand, nearly as easy as simple math; 1 + 1 equals 2. One worker plus one supporter equals two people working for improvements for workers. Simple math.
Thanks for giving us the opportunity to clarify that with you, you are welcome to drop by anytime.
Many of the comments here veer off from the original rant of the regressive writer, who says that essentially you have to be economically and historically illiterate as well as ignorant to be a Democrat. But that’s not true! You *don’t* have to be stupid to run as a Democrat, and the libertarians who run as Democrats prove it. Good for them! It’s about time there were Democrats who didn’t worship Statist power.
Libertarians who run as Democrats are simply frauds, sort of like you Tim who pretended to be a New Hampshire native when running for political office here in New Hampshire, but who in fact lives in Florida. Possibly if you lived up here you’d understand what’s going on with the Free Staters and their efforts at de-frauding voters. But I’m sure, unlike Sarah Palin the famed conservative who could peer at Russia through her Alaskan kitchen window, I’m afraid you lack the same skills to peer at New Hampshire from the front window of your law firm in Florida. As a result your analysis is coming up a little blind.