Some interesting tidbits on Allen Hacker

I’m not trying to start another war (even though one’s probably gonna come anyway) but I figured this’d probably be relevant information about the Badnarik campaign’s “secret plan” or whatever. I’m typically not one to pick on a guy’s religious beliefs but this is just… well, you be the judge of whether you’d have given this guy any money whatsoever had you known about this in the first place.

There’s this, where Allen Hacker “talks about his up coming program, the State of Aescir. He explores his understandings of the Galactic Consciousness and how we each play a role in it.”

And then we’ve got this, where Hacker is basically starting his own religion with (imagine that!) himself as the messiah figure. Campaign funds locked on a moon of Jupiter indeed. So that’s why he was talking about freedom for the next TEN THOUSAND YEARS.

And yes, it checks out. Tom Knapp did a check of the addresses and all-these aren’t two guys that just both happen to be named Allen Hacker. Plus it’s the same photo used on both the Galactic Consciousness whatever and Articulate Campaigns.

So forgive me for saying it, but… Hail Xenu!

UPDATE: I did a little digging on Hacker’s site, and this is what else I’ve found. Apparently there’s room in his deep-seated theological beliefs for an internet service provider, some diatribe mixing religion and politics, some sort of ripoff of the Scientology diagnostic thing (don’t forget to contribute!), and something so appropriately talking about “having access to real truth instead of smiling lies and deception.” There’s more, much more… oh do join me after the jump, I pray thee.

Oh yes, and I went to that aescir.net site, and clicked on the “review the benefits of membership” thing and this is what I found staring me in the face:

Non-Indoctrination Policy

Free Will,
and the unquestioned right of every individual to make personal choices,
without duress from anyone,
are to be respected absolutely
and honored above all purposes whatsoever,
whether a particular choice is fully informed or not.

“Whether a particular choice is fully informed or not…” sounds an awful lot like a sneaky disclaimer to the suckers he’d love to rip off. But it gets better, he goes into his unique qualifications to be your Lord, Saviour and Galactic Emissary:

Speaker Allen is a self-educated semanticist, Manifestational Chaos Theorist and metaphysician who has dedicated his life to the applications of his science to improving the human condition. He is the primary developer of the doctrine of Acceptance (the Æscirian Triosophy).
Allen is the founder of the Æscirian Service Consulates and Speaker for the State of Æscir. His work is to articulate and present the Æscirian Triosophy to those who seek its benefits, and to serve as State of Æscir’s chief representative to the world through ASC Missions Group, ntc., a sovereign ecclesiastical Trust, and its various Missions.

He is also the founder, chief developer and Sr. Partner of The Æscirian Institute for Articulate Management, ntc. (TM), a visionary new respect-based business management method and management consultancy, headquartered in Mountain View, California.

Further biographical material is included in the Speaker’s book, Mind Matters – how thought becomes reality, available elsewhere on this site.

Just speaking as someone who’s contemplating joining the clergy himself, but anytime you hear the phrase “self-educated” in context of someone who seeks to be your pastor/priest/Grand Poobah, run. It’s a scam. This is one case where the market self-regulates with things like seminary degrees and holy orders, and for a very good reason.

Oh yes, and don’t forget that this holistic organization requires tons of fine print. Jesus and Buddha didn’t need a team of lawyers, and that’s apparently why they lose at spirituality. And there’s also the legal fine print on his Articulate Campaigns site:

This website (blog) is an official News Outlet of the State of Æscir, by and through its agent and representative, ASC Missions Group, ntc, Speaker Allen Hacker, Trustee.

Any attempt to censor or prosecute anything published herein will be met affirmatively with the fullest force of the law, without mercy or reservation and with absolute prejudice. Refer to US v Johnson 76 F. Supp 538, et seq, et al. However, anything published here is free for use so long as it is not altered or quoted out of context, and proper attribution is given. Allen

So yes. Do keep all that in mind next time you’re thinking of donating to a political campaign.

P.S. I wonder, does this mean that all the money that the Badnarik campaign gave to Articulate Campaigns is technically tax-free since it’s a religious organization? I bet the little weasel’d try to make the case.

120 Responses to “Some interesting tidbits on Allen Hacker”

  1. torah Says:

    Anyone who is a fan of Star Trek or the Sci-Fi channel should not be allowed to run for office, run a campaign, or be involved with the Libertarian Party.

    Is this why people say that Libertarian views are from outer space?

  2. Allen Hacker Says:

    Stuart,

    You know how I’ve been talking here about intellectual dishonesty? Well, you mixing that ‘moon of jupiter’ excerpt from paulie’s excellent spoof into my religious writings is a fine example.

    So are those “I’m not trying to start another war…” and “I’m typically not one to pick on a guy’s religious beliefs…” disclaimers. You did exactly those things. What did you hope to accomplish by mispositioning, ridiculing and misrepresenting someone’s religion?

    And what is that “but this is just…”? It is just, What? Different from your religion. So what?

    When did religious tests (unconstitutional in the US) become acceptable to libertarians?

    Is this all you’ve got, now that everyone knows there’s nothing to all the hullabloo that you guys put out before? How far off the rails will you go?

    All in all, not a very auspicious start to your tenure at TPW.

    But if there’s a fun part to this one, it’s knowing that you implying I’m a Scientologist will probably get you into trouble with the Rondroids. Now that would be just deserts.

    0

  3. Stuart Richards Says:

    Pfft, let them come. I don’t need a legal staff to take on those fascists, we’ve got the ACLU here to stand for freedom of speech.

    Anyway, it’s not unconstitutional for me to laugh at you or suggest that giving you money is just outright goofy. Yes, you have the freedom to believe whatever you want-I would fight and die for that freedom-but that doesn’t mean that the rest of us have to agree with or even respect your beliefs.

    You were kicked out of Scientology. That’s pretty much a good enough reason for just about anyone, political ideology be damned, to not give you a penny.

  4. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Dude.

    Thrown out of one scam religion and trying to start another scam religion.

    This is so getting mentioned in my blog.

  5. Mike N. Says:

    Church of Hacker launches, Hacker anoints self “messiah,” “genius.”

    The Austin Chronicle reports:

    http://thirdpartywatch.com/2006/12/06/badnarik-begs-for-another-200k/#comment-75932

  6. Mike N. Says:

    2004 TX CD-10 Results:

    Michael T. McCaul (REP)
    182,113 votes
    78.61%
    $2,927,850 spent

    Robert Fritsche (LIB)
    35,569
    15.35%
    $0 spent

    Lorenzo Sadun (Write-in)
    13,961
    6.02%
    N/A spent

    2006 TX CD-10 Results:

    Michael T. McCaul (REP)
    97,726
    55.28%
    $1,146,043 spent

    Ted Ankrum (DEM)
    71,415
    40.40%
    $72,061 spent

    Michael Badnarik (LIB)
    7,614
    4.30%
    $411,146 spent

    Sources:

    http://www.opensecrets.org/

    http://elections.sos.state.tx.us/elchist.exe

  7. Allen Hacker Says:

    :-)

    I’m not even going to try to correct the errors you’ve got going on this one. Better you should have all the fun you can now, before anyone looks at you and what you’re doing in the light of day.

    You guys have no idea how bad, and how dumb, you look right now.

    0

  8. Mike N. Says:

    The 2004 WRITE-IN received nearly twice as many votes than Badnarik did in 2006!

  9. Stuart Richards Says:

    I’m fairly certain we’re looking just fine, actually. You’re not going to try to correct our “errors” because you know you can’t say anything, you’re wrong, you’ve been found out. You have no chance to swindle make your time, all your lies are belong to us.

    Anyway, why don’t you go start another religion and make a million dollars?

  10. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Er, you should be careful about calling Hacker a weasel…

    ... the weasels might sue for defamation.

  11. Tom Bryant Says:

    rolling with laughter

    I don’t know what is funnier, reading the kooky religion that Hacker formed, or reading his replies about how everyone else in the world looks stupid but not him. I totally support people having religious viewpoints that are different. But with that comes the freedom to be a kook.

    Of course, in all fairness, the kooks are the ones who buy into Hacker’s (and other similiar) religion. The creators of the religion aren’t kooky, they’re just looking for the easiest way to make money. Unless they really believe that they are a self-taught Metaphysicist Poobah.

  12. Executive Detractor Says:

    This blog is great for attacking Libertarians and other third parties. I’d like to suggest two future topics:

    1. What role does Mike Nelson’s homosexuality play in his obsessive attacks against the Badnarik campaign? Are his attacks a manifestation of revenge against a society that has treated him unfairly? Is he justified in lashing out and ridiculing others? Why was he negligent in joining other Libertarians in the Dallas gay pride parade? Is it fair to attack him just because he attacks others? Maybe not. Maybe so. What are appropriate boundaries?

    2. What role does Kris Overstreet’s cartoon pornographic hobby play in his tendancy to trash other libertarians he considers out of the mainstream: http://www.wlpcomics.com/
    Is this just a cover-up for his own self-perceived radical instincts?

    Google “kris overstreet nipples”

    Or just go straight to this Dallas news story:

    http://www.dallasobserver.com/Issues/2004-11-11/news/feature.html

    Texas is BIG. We got lots of Libertarians and enough gossip to fill a blog dedicated alone to Texas kooks who post on this blog.

    I’ve got one just about myself:
    http://keepaustinstupid.blogspot.com/

  13. Stuart Richards Says:

    Yay, Austin has a puppet account.

  14. Mike N. Says:

    This blog is great for attacking bald old men. I’d like to suggest one future topic:

    1. What role does Wes Benedict’s baldness play in his obsessive attacks against men with hair on their heads? Are his attacks a manifestation of revenge against a society that has treated him unfairly? Is he justified in lashing out and ridiculing others? Why was he negligent in joining other bald men in the Austin Bald pride parade? Is it fair to attack him just because he attacks others? Maybe not. Maybe so. What are appropriate boundaries?

  15. Austin Cassidy Says:

    “Yay, Austin has a puppet account.”

    Who has a what now?

  16. Stuart Richards Says:

    Blah, misspoke.

    Meant Allen. My bad.

    Turns out I was wrong anyway. :

  17. Executive Detractor Says:

    Bald is beautiful. Check out this update (you might have to refresh your browser):

    http://keepaustinstupid.blogspot.com/

    Mike Nelson, if Timothy West will let me borrow his World’s Smallest Political Quiz booth and if the Austin Bald Parade allows political entries, I think about participating next time.

  18. Mike N. Says:

    Wes,

    Can you post one of me in drag as well?

    I have checked with the Bald pride parade officials, they welcome political booths.

  19. Executive Detractor Says:

    I can’t speak for Wes (because he doesn’t post on these blogs—or if he does, he does it in a special clandestine way), however, I suspect he would say that he doesn’t have a picture of you in drag, but if you sent him one, he might post it (but it should be a real one—not fake).

    As for the Bald pride parade, he doubts you were able to check with them so quickly, but if you did already confirm permission, he guesses it’s up to Timothy West to loan his Quiz Booth at this point.

  20. Mike N. Says:

    Wes,

    Yes, make mine as real as yours. Photoshop will do. I prefer blue whigs, pink lipstick and saggy boobs.

    Quiz Booths can be purchased for $100,000 from the Church of Hacker. Simply go to www.churchofhacker.org and click the donation button as quickly as you can.

  21. Mike N. Says:

    Be sure to act quickly on the Church of Hacker order. Lord Hacker has been very busy working on his “Bible of Infinite Wisdom” and may not be able to process your order until he gets $200k in donations from his followers so that he may complete his masterpiece.

    A quick google search indicates the next Bald Pride Day will be February 15th. Act now! Mortgage your home and sell your car if necessary. We are talking freedom for the next 10,000 years, this is serious shit.

  22. Executive Detractor Says:

    In all honesty and truth and in the spirit of unity, I don’t suppose this would be the best time to ask the Constitution Party to put its differences aside and support the Libertarian Party? Howz about it? Join Mike Nelson, Kris Overstreet, Wes Benedict, and others. Together on these blogs we (I mean they) can become America’s third party force. Allz we need is for the moderate Libertarians to keep reminding the general public and especially the Constitution Party that only some of the Libertarians support legalizing heroine, not all of them. Can I get an A-men? Can I get some moderates to repeat adnauseum that moderates aren’t for legalizing heroine? Can we get moderates to post all over the web that moderate Libertarians aren’t for legalizing heroine and if they repeat that enough will it stick?

    Can we recruit some moderate Libertarian Party candidates who will pledge to speak at every public event that “I don’t support legalizing heroine?”

  23. Mike N. Says:

    I suspect he would say that he doesn’t have a picture of you in drag, but if you sent him one, he might post it (but it should be a real one—not fake).

    Here ya go:

    http://www.shirleyqliquor.com/

  24. Executive Detractor Says:

    I didn’t ask for your favorite picture of Timothy West: http://www.shirleyqliquor.com/

    Can you photoshop that West Virgina Hill Billy down to something more appropriate for Texas? Perhaps poke it with a Free State Project porcupine quill.

  25. Stuart Richards Says:

    Oh c’mon now, this is just petty bickering at this point.

  26. Executive Detractor Says:

    Oops! I forgot that Libertarians weren’t supposed to mention the heroine thing. Is there any way we can get Austin Cassidy to quietly delete all the references to heroine on his blog?

    Austin, the Keep Austin Stupid Blog isn’t directed at you. Austin is the Live Music Capital of the World (the gubmint says so), not just your name.

    Michael Nelson, I think it’s time for you to post something positive about a Libertarian Candidate somewhere in the U.S., maybe recommend everyone donate to them, so you can pretend you’re not just a poo-head.

  27. Mike N. Says:

    Can you photoshop that West Virgina Hill Billy down to something more appropriate for Texas? Perhaps poke it with a Free State Project porcupine quill.

    If you insist:

    http://bgpso.rso.wisc.edu/index_jpg_files/Shirley.gif

    FSP porcupine quill is not in the picture, but it is rumored to be up her ass.

  28. Executive Detractor Says:

    OUCH! Don’t poke me with one of those. Where do I issue a retraction?

  29. Mike N. Says:

    Wesley Benedict, I think it’s time for you to order that Quiz Booth from the Church of Hacker, maybe actually man the thing at your Bald Pride Parade, so you can pretend you are the Texas LP’s Executive Director.

  30. Executive Detractor Says:

    I don’t know about that (pardon, I mean HE doesn’t know about that). You know it’s all the heroine and Carl Milsted thing and allz about radicalizm and I don’t know where other bald people fall on the other quiz that Carl has. Does Carl have a booth that clearly states “I (I mean he) don’t support legalizing heroine!” I (pardon me, I mean Wesley) wants a booth that makes it clear that REASONABLE LIBERTARIANS ARE OPPOSED TO LEGALIZING HEROINE FOR NOW at this BALD AFFAIR and we have a quiz too-dee for people who DON’T want folks stumbling upon the the secret heroine issue that we must keep secret from the Constitution Party.

    I just don’t see any way possible for Libertarians to attract Constitution Party support if we don’t keep this heroine legalization secret under wraps.

    Anyway, if the heroine free Quiz Too Dee shows up, I (I mean he) will come up with a way to keep the Executive Director thing under the radar as well.

  31. Erica Dondera Says:

    Heroine is funding terrorism in Afganistan.

  32. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Well, Wes, it’s very peculiar that someone who thinks I’m as bad for the party as all that, what with my lack of fashion sense and all, that you should have recruited me as a candidate AND that you should have been effusive in your thanks for my running for office. More peculiar still that an officer of the party of principle should switch his attitude from ingratiating to belligerent without indication, warning, or apparent cause.

    Or it could be that you’re just attacking anyone who questions the anarchists and mocks the lunatics in this party… and in particular who questions the wisdom of having a paid executive director under a contract that costs the state party more per month than its total monthly revenue…

    ... thankfully, I’ve been too busy with other things these past few months to pay attention to such things, so I don’t know how things stand now. I’ll rely on Mike N., who is quite a bit obnoxious but evidently can find the facts, to let people know whether your services are worth the price.

    BTW, Wes, you wouldn’t happen to be a Scientologist by any chance?

  33. Nigel Watt Says:

    Learn to spell heroin. All of you. And chill with the LPTX infighting.

  34. David A Spitzley Says:

    Man, this makes me feel better about all the Nader/Cobb infighting inside the Green Party over the last few years…

  35. Carl Says:

    Heroine is legal.

    Heroin is illegal.

    Duh.

  36. Mike N. Says:

    and in particular who questions the wisdom of having a paid executive director under a contract that costs the state party more per month than its total monthly revenue…

    Ahh ha! Now Wes Benedict’s support for Lord Hacker makes more sense…

  37. Allen Hacker Says:

    Kris Overstreet,

    Mike Nelson finding the facts might be one thing,, but him understanding and presenting them objectively and truthfully? Not a chance.

    He has masterfully mixed truth with opinion and ridicule based on carefully omitted facts, and created lies that none of you seem willing to or capable of sorting out.

    That my consulting firm got paid for staffing the campaign is no way at all an indicator that either I got the money personally or it was embezzled. But once tnce the duke of obfuscation had spoken, none of you listen.

    Same as with the current flight of fantasy. Name-calling and ridicule substituted for substance. That’s his M.O., and it’s shameful that you guys don’t care. Your first indication should have been the 1986 copyright mark on the material he misquoted out of context as what I’m working on next.

    If any of you think that this uber-uncool witchhunt is going to get you anywhere you want to be is head-in-the-sand out of touch with the way things work in the world as you pervert it.

    First, you can’t embarrass or shame me into leaving. I’ve been through things that make you guys a hobby. Literally.

    Second, now that this idiocy has RSSd out into the world and is showing up on blogs you don’t even know about (just like I told you all it was doing with the campaign finance lies), more and more people are seeing it and learning about my work than might have. Among them are former scientologists and others who never really got into it but were looking for explanations of things you guys are terrified to even look at, and they’ll find AEscir where they might otherwise not have. Many of them will join the tens of thousands who’ve read my first book and use what of it works for them, and in the long run, their memory of you will be their gratefulness to the forgotten loonies who attacked something they didn’t understand and thus made it more visible.

    Meanwhile, the only place following Mike Nelson will get you to is Stupidtown; you know, that place just over the cliff… the place where self-absorbed little boys tie cats together by the tails and hang them over the clothesline, just for laughs.

    Keep going, that is where you’ll be, and how you’re remembered.

    0

  38. Tom Bryant Says:

    Allen Hacker said:
    “That my consulting firm got paid for staffing the campaign is no way at all an indicator that either I got the money personally or it was embezzled. But once tnce the duke of obfuscation had spoken, none of you listen.”

    This is a clear misrepresentation of the facts. Many of us have come out and defended you by making the very same argument.

    However, what you seem incapable of doing is presenting the facts. Have you ever come out said what the money your firm received was spent on? If so, can you point me to it?

    I also have to wonder about your apparent joy that although this campaign has wrecked the LP’s desperately needed fundraising ability and has ruined the political career of a good man, in the end it will bring more people to the religion you have created. Was the goal of running an LP campaign to help the LP or to help the religious that you have created?

    You complain about people not listening, but you’re not saying anything. So speak up if you want us to listen. Tell us where the money went that your firm got, and put to rest all the embezzling accusations.

  39. Allen Hacker Says:

    Tom,

    This is a broken record. You asking nicely in a tainted forum won’t get the answers to false allegations that came from before.

    I have too many times explained that the money that goes to Articulate Management passes through to pay for staffing and indirect expenses that don’t have to be reported to the FEC. We cleared all this with the FEC before we made the change, and the only reason we moved the staff to behind the consultant’s veil was because the rats you’re standing in front of attacked the staff by name on public blogs merely for getting paid (not enough) for (difficult) work that no one else would show up and do.

    Now, anything beyond that is a breach of their privacy and I will never answer immoral or illegal questions.

    Everything we’ve done here is legal and accounted for to those entities who have a legal power to know. Our bookkeeping and compliance are perfect. That this level of compliance, amazing in that it is done by radical libertarians, is all anybody gets, because libertarians either won’t play nice or won’t defend each other against the few who play dirty.

    Now that’s the last iteration of the facts on this blog, which as an entity unto itself, didn’t even deserve that. If you continue to ask for more despite having no legal or even moral basis for asking, just because you want to know, you are out of line.

    If you really want to know the truth and have a fair trial, ask Mike Nelson about the rude email he sent to Liberty PAC, about lying to me about it in a reply to my response to it directly above his own wrods. Ask him for the facts of his claims about what he says I’ve been paid. Ask him, not me. He’s the accuser and the burden of proof is on him. Make him prove his libelous statements. He can’t prove them. And his confessions are in the archives of HoT and on my hard drive and backups. That’s why he’ll be crushed in any action I bring for “libel per se”. (Look it up; I don’t have to prove damages.)

    But don’t expect to get treated any better than Tom Knapp did when he tried—and got nothing but bile.

    Then ask yourself, why are you even in this illegitimate conversation?

    0

  40. Chris Moore Says:

    As Tom states, many others (including myself) have repeatedly defended you and the campaign in regards to accusations of fraud and embezzlement. Your firm was paid ~$150,000 over the course of the campaign. All I would like to know is what that money was spent on. I’m not demanding to know, as I have no right to demand anything. I’m merely stating that I will never donate a dime to anything associated with Allen Hacker (even if you are the lowliest of volunteers) before knowing this information.

    I could care less whether you are a Scientologist, Buddist, Hackerist, Christian, etc. I would just like to know where that specific $150,000 went.

    Personally, I find your religion kooky and ridiculous, but many people feel the same way about mine. All of that is irrelevant. How was the money paid to your firm spent?

  41. Chris Moore Says:

    I was writing when you posted, Allen.

    Nevermind. I will never have my question answered. I can live with that. Just don’t expect donations from me in the future.

  42. Mike N. Says:

    It really doesn’t matter if Lord Hacker pocketed the $130k+ (which is where I am sure most of it went) or if it went to pay a bunch of nutjobs on his staff wearing V for Vendetta masks.

    The only thing that matters is the results:

    The 2004 WRITE-IN received nearly twice as many votes than Badnarik did in 2006. That alone is very telling.

    So Hacker, where did the other $300k go? Or is that top secret too?

  43. Tom Bryant Says:

    Allen,

    “Staffing and indirect expenses” doesn’t really answer the question. I’m assuming from your fundraising that you do not fall under “Staffing”, but it would help to clarify that. And what exactly does indirect expenses mean? Did you benefit in any way shape or form from that? If so, how much?

    And please, if you do fall under “salary” and if you did benefit from the “indirect expenses,” it’s not the end of the world. I’d expect the manager to get compensated for his work.

    I’m not asking you to violate the privacy of the staffers. I’m asking you to volunteer information that would put to rest the accusations of you lining your pockets/embezzling/etc.

    It’s a little suspicious that whenever you reply you are very vague, give no hard numbers, and leave open the possibility that you benefited from the money. You’re doing a poor job of dispelling the myth that you lined your pocket.

    I really have no comment on your problelms with Mike Nelson. That’s between you and him, deal with it.

    As for your question, I was a supporter of the campaign. I gave you money assuming that it would be spent wisely. It’s obvious that the money was not spent wisely, but that was the risk I took when I donated to you. You were not trained campaign manager, you were a libertarian with his heart in the right place doing his best.

    I’m not sure why you have such disdain towards your donors asking very simple questions about how the money was spent.

  44. paulie cannoli Says:

    Heroine is legal.

    Heroin is illegal.

    Duh.

    How about synthetic superheroine?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_superheroes

  45. paulie cannoli Says:

    The following non-exclusive list indicates terms that are trademarks of
    ASC Missions Group, ntc.:

    Articulate Management, Alignment Construct, Affirmative Direction, Analysis & Strategy Consultation, Effectiveness Profile, Objective Communication, Socratic Inquiry, Strategic Contingency Partnering, Strategic Contingency Planning; Standing Enhancement Procedures.

  46. paulie cannoli Says:

    Erica Dondera Says:
    December 13th, 2006 at 10:41 am

    Heroine is funding terrorism in Afganistan.

    VeilWoman?

  47. Tom Bryant Says:

    How hard is it to say:

    “We raised $430,000

    $150,000 was spent on staff salaries, plane tickets, other travel fees
    $200,000 was spent on fundraising activities
    $50,000 was spent on office rent/furniture/website/internet connection
    $30,000 was spent on campaign outreach including 3 bill boards and 10 radio ad spots.

    Of the money raised, I received $20,000 in salary.”

    What I don’t get is that this information is handy if the campaign is following accounting procedures. The amount of time it would take to submit it is just a few minutes.

    Instead, Allen keeps up about Mike Nelson, suing people who don’t like him, proving whats wrong with the LP, taking the “moral high ground” by not telling his donors how their money was spent, etc. Then he has the gall to complain that this conversation is still going on. The ball has been in Allen’s court since November 8th to end this once and for all.

  48. paulie cannoli Says:

    Speaking of the Texas Bald Pride Parade…

    Do y’all have a Russian-Mongolian-Siberian Native-Jewish-New Yorker-Alabaman Pride Parade?

    Don’t we get a parade too?

  49. paulie cannoli Says:

    “Face it. You guys have taken a wrong turn, and I’m your mentor toward getting back on track. I know you don’t like it, but you appointed me and I am trilled at the prospect of helping you find your way, one way or another.”
    -AAH

  50. Mike N. Says:

    What I don’t get is that this information is handy if the campaign is following accounting procedures. The amount of time it would take to submit it is just a few minutes.

    According to Lord Hacker:

    Our bookkeeping and compliance are perfect.

    I agree with Tom, this should be a no-brainer. Unless Lord Hacker and his church are trying to cover something up.

  51. Chris Moore Says:

    Tom,

    Allen just doesn’t get it. He’s too caught up in his little pissing contest with Mike. He will have a very hard time raising a dime in libertarian circles not because of any fraud or embezzlement accusations, but because of accusations of incompetence and piss-poor money management and strategy decisions. There is zero evidence of fraud, especially considering it appears he is contractually owed about $150,000 anyway. I don’t think he needs to address accusations of fraud, because there is zero evidence.

    He does have to account for the clear evidence of incompetence if he wishes to be a significant fund raiser for the party in the future. I appreciate his effort, but he just sucked as a campaign manager. I probably would as well. The difference is Hacker tried and failed spectacularly. Again, I appreciate the effort and there is nothing inherently wrong with failure. However, if he wishes to make the claim that he would do better the next time, then the burden is on him to prove it.

    He has failed to convince me that he has learned ANYTHING from the experience, other than that people like Mike Nelson exist. And Mike Nelson was no were near the reason Michael Badnarik received 4.5% of the vote.

  52. Carl Says:

    Whatever the merits of Mr. Hacker’s metaphysical ideas, his web sites are filled with hype and overstatement.

    “one of the most original thinkers of our time”

    “You are about to experience reality ”

    “Though now I finally possessed the ultimate in spiritual liberation, I chose to remain in the world as we know it and offer what I had found to other seekers. ”

    What I saw seemed very familiar, having seen similar things dozens of times from my days (long ago) of dabbling in things New Age. There may well be some original insights in the advertised book, but the fundamental epiphany described is very much in the mainstream of New Age literature.

    Such absurd heights of hyperbole are common in the New Age literature. I think it stems from the use of affirmations and positive thinking. While useful at times, these practices can lead to self-deception. Solomon taught that wisdom comes from listening to critics, not silencing your inner critic. Methinks he was correct.

    Pride cometh before a fall.

  53. Mike N. Says:

    Michael Badnarik received 4.5% of the vote.

    Michael Badnarik (LIB)
    7,614 votes
    4.30%
    $430k+ spent

  54. Kris Overstreet Says:

    No, Allen, the burden of proof is on YOU, the seller.

    You’re trying to sell us your services, especially the report you claim will solve all the Libertarian Party’s problems.

    So far what you’ve shown is that you refuse to answer anyone who questions you and attack anyone who brings up facts that put you in a poor light.

    If you want that extra $200,000, for whatever purpose, YOU and YOU ALONE must prove to prospective donors that it will be money well spent.

    So answer the questions asked: how was the money spent?

  55. paulie cannoli Says:

    What I saw seemed very familiar, having seen similar things dozens of times from my days (long ago) of dabbling in things New Age. There may well be some original insights in the advertised book, but the fundamental epiphany described is very much in the mainstream of New Age literature.

    Much as with Scientology, higher levels of enlightenment can only be achieved by sending money, as is also the case with the Badnarik for Congress Campaign Report.

    The more you send, the more en-light-ened your wallet you will be.

    Did Yeshua not teach us that unburdening yourself of your material possessions makes it easier to enter the kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 19:24)?

    And did Gautama not give up his earthly kingdom to become the Buddha?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha

    So to must you unenlightened masses give up your earthly wealth to enter the higher Aescirian State.

  56. Mike N. Says:

    “Now that’s the last iteration of the facts on this blog, which as an entity unto itself, didn’t even deserve that. If you continue to ask for more despite having no legal or even moral basis for asking, just because you want to know, you are out of line.” —Allen Hacker

    You are all out of line I tell you!! Now get back in line and worship Lord Hacker! He will have none of this rubbish!

  57. paulie cannoli Says:

    It seems that, much as Yeshua took the sins of the world unto himself to become our Savior, Speaker Allen is willing to take on the burden of all your sinful material wealth so that you too can achieve transcendental enlightenment™.

  58. Allen Hacker Says:

    Chris, Tom,

    Forgive me, but you are part of my problem with Mike Nelson, since this conversation would be totally different if not for him. I’ll cover that in detail in the final report.

    As for whether the money was spent wrong, one simply can’t state that one definitely, either way. Certainly, had I believed we would only raise $450K, I would have budgeted differently. I might not even have joined the campaign, because I don’t do paper candidates, I fight to win.

    But I believed we would raise considerably more, and so I budgeted differently. Had the money come in and we won, or even just gotten 20%, as Tom Knapp has offered, we’d have been heros.

    Any way you look at that race, it required at least $750K spent very well, or over $1 million at least.

    I still believe we would have raised the money if not for the embarrassment heaped upon us and the LP itself by false accusations of embezzlement and ongoing proof that libertarians eat their young and can’t be taken seriously.

    Several other things would not have happened as well, including Michael becoming demoralized by so many potential repeat contributors asking him to defend against false allegations a la the “beating your wife” question. Michael caving in on making his telephone calls is directly attributable to Mike Nelson putting a vicious environment into place, a thing which would never have gotten past the first lie had you not all decided there must be fire under the smokescreen he was fanning. And with Michael caving in, I can easily attribute between $100-150K or more in contributions not received to be Mike Nelson’s fault.

    Meanwhile Nelson sits just a few comments up, continuing to pretend some authority to define reality in the sickest of ways, noticably unchallenged by either of you defenders of truth, light and liberty.

    Since the first $400K went to infrastructure and development, that entire $100-150K and most everything after it until Nov 1st would have gone for marketing. I never intended to get paid unless there was a surplus available at the end, because winning would have made my day and that would have led to more than enough compensation. So I never took more for myself than was actually needed for expenses.

    That I, and in fact the staff as well, lived most of the campaign on bad restaurant food and fear of rent seems to have gone completely unappreciated here.

    The real campaign never happened, because we only got enough to build the cars, and not enough to put gas in it. Have any opinion you want about how much I spent on the car, I saw a potential $2-3 million available, and I built a car that could be driven on less than the balance of the first million. Disagree if you like, but do it for decent reasons and in a respectful manner, please.

    For you to declare that the money was misspent is no more valid than saying that a startup that spent all its seed money developing the physical plant and product wasted their money because they couldn’t move into the delivery phase when their second-round financing fell through.

    The libertarian donor base in our mailing list from the presidential campaign was the seed-money source, and maybe the second-round foundation if the democrat actually got lost or crushed along the way. The true second-round money didn’t come in from the peripheral groups I was working because they got wind of embezzlement charges and they did the same thing you’ve done: never even asking the accuser for proof of the charges, expected us to disprove a negative, and withheld the money and support “just in case”.

    So our second-round contributions didn’t materialize in exactly the same manner you’ve promised to withhold your own future support. Illogically, irrationally, without a shred of evidence of wrongdoing and absolutely no proof by the accuser.

    God help us if this is what libertarians are like in jury trials.

    Forgive me, but the tendency to take every detail in isolation and make only one or two of them the end-all of one’s understanding and the foundation of one’s conclusions is a serious failure of discernment. The truth is, I have never seen a more widespread lack of discernment anywhere outside the LP. I thought the voters were proactively ignorant, but they’ve got nothing on most of us. But then they aren’t members of a cult of anti-authority who believe without question that people, even our friends, must be prevented from having any power at all, lest they become corrupt.

    Finally, and for the last time, I did not say the information you deserve would not be forthcoming. I said it wouldn’t happen here. So just stop trying to get it here and be patient. I have the nightmare remnants of a blindsided campaign to wind down and close out, and as a matter of fact, I won’t know the exact answers until that’s done.

    I will happily state in categorical terms exactly where the money went, except that the “staffing” entry will be an unitemized total. You will know exactly how much went for my expenses and how much if any went into my pocket for personal operating expenditures. But you don’t need to know, and will never know, exactly who the staffers were and how much each was paid. From what you’ve written above, you should be able to live with that.

    Now, if you’ll kindly back off and let me finish my work, I would appreciate it.

    0

  59. paulie cannoli Says:

    “You are about to experience reality ”

    Scientists have long debated whether the ultimate state of matter is particle or wave.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave-Particle_duality

    The AEscirian insight™ resolves this conflict in the form of a finger wave.

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=finger+wave

  60. paulie cannoli Says:

    Any way you look at that race, it required at least $750K spent very well, or over $1 million at least.

    I still believe we would have raised the money if not for the embarrassment heaped upon us and the LP itself by false accusations of embezzlement and ongoing proof that libertarians eat their young and can’t be taken seriously.

    Ultimately accusations by Mike Nelson were only a tiny portion of your problem. A much larger portion was lack of tangible evidence of campaign activity.

    For example, a friend of mine sent you $300 early in the campaign and would have sent you more had you done TV ads, distributed DVDs as you said you would, etc.

    He did not send you more money after the initial donation, even though at that point he thought Mike Nelson’s accusations were overblown.

    Now, he believes Mike Nelson was right all along.

    I suspect a lot of people’s thoughts on the Badnarik campaign followed a smiliar trajectory. This was because of what the campaign actually did – if you had done more outreach, and more effective outreach, nothing Mike Nelson said about you would have made much of a dent.

    There’s nothing wrong with getting paid as long as you get results.

    It’s only when the bulk of a campaign’s activity centers around overhead, and the results are far below expectations, that overhead becomes an issue.

  61. Mike N. Says:

    Lord Hacker,

    Is it true that you recently confided to someone that you thought Badnarik had a nervous breakdown during the campaign and that is why he lost? Or is the reason still blog comments?

  62. Carl Says:

    Allen: a good post, far more persuasive than the prior psychologizing.

    I still think you overestimate the power of Mike Nelson’s accusations. He was just a symptom of a bigger problem: Libertarians have been burned by hype time and time again. These experiences have bred cynicism.

    And for this reason, I think open book management is necessary for big ticket LP campaigns. Yes, it is reasonable to hide names of employees. However, I wonder about hiding hourly rates paid. You can shut up any detractor who says the pay is too high by offering a job at the suggested level. (Either that, or you’ll get some lower priced labor.)

    I also question the wisdom of such a high overhead operation, given the small size of the party. Starting so small, a bootstrap operation makes more sense than a Wall St. style operation.

    Under other conditions, these decisions may well have been optimal.

  63. Mike N. Says:

    From Hackers spam letter titled “Special Update: Plan B from Badnarik for Congress campaign manager Allen Hacker” Aug 18, 2006:

    Sell your extra car. Borrow. Get some friends to chip in. Put it together in a couple of installments if you have to, but start right now, and do it online.

    I need to go to the Democrat in 5 days and tell him that you’ve newly invested some shocking amount in that same 5 days just to show him that not only do we have the candidate, we have the money and support to win. That will to get him to withdraw and do the only thing he can that might guarantee the defeat of his nemesis.

    I think the Democrat will go for it, I really do. Now, all I need is for you to go for it too. Let’s all go All-in for Liberty.

    (emphasis mine)

  64. paulie cannoli Says:

    So our second-round contributions didn’t materialize in exactly the same manner you’ve promised to withhold your own future support. Illogically, irrationally, without a shred of evidence of wrongdoing and absolutely no proof by the accuser.

    Political contributions are discretionary. Simply trading on a presidential campaign, promises, and a secret plan will get you one round of contributions.

    Round two is simply not going to happen unless you get some tangible evidence of progress, in the absence of an already-developed and tested political machine such as the major parties.

    A small part of that natural skepticism may have been amplified by accusations on the internet. But bulk of the skepticism would have been there with or without them.

    Your potential contributors, like potential venture capitalists anywhere, were looking for evidence of achievement from you. The burden of proof was on you, not on your accusers. Would their accusations have mattered if you could point to tangible campaign activities (TV ads, DVD, etc)?

    It’s only the empty structure which you created at that point of the campaign which could have become an echo chamber for accusations.

    You may wish it was otherwise and think that people owe you the benefit of the doubt, but it doesn’t work that way.

    If people see a track record or actual immediate results for what their money has bought, they’ll send more.

    If not – once bitten, twice shy. LP donors have been burned before; they’re a naturally cautious and skeptical lot.

    They’ve heard lots of sky-high promises that turned out to have been made of thin air in the past.

    So don’t expect long term patience unless you deliver, and deliver early.

  65. paulie cannoli Says:

    Carl,

    http://thirdpartywatch.com/2006/12/12/some-interesting-tidbits-on-allen-hacker/#comment-76839

    100% Correct.

    We have some ideological differences, but it sounds like you have a pretty firm grasp of practical politics.

  66. matt Says:

    Allen,
    Can you print up two different versions of the report? Maybe one about what went wrong, what went right, and how to do better in ‘08 and another about Mike, sabotage, blogs, or whatever?

    I’d read the first one with interest, as long as it’s long on analysis and short on metaphysics.

  67. paulie cannoli Says:

    God help us if this is what libertarians are like in jury trials.

    In jury trials the burden of proof is reasonably placed on the accuser, because it is the accused who is at risk of being deprived of life or freedom (or wealth in a civil trial).

    When you want people to give you money for a venture, particularly a bold and unusual one, the burden of proof is on you to convince prospective contributors why they should give up something (money).

  68. Mike N. Says:

    From Hacker’s spam letter titled “Help us surpass our goal!” March 21, 2006:

    We’re going to do polling, then commit a public relations coup, then poll gain. And then we’re going to hit the streets talking to the voters and non-voters alike. We’re going to put up yard signs and window signs and billboards. We’re going to have house parties and megaparties, radio spots, cable shows and concerts. We’re planning to do something new, too. We’re planning to create a new contract with the voters, one that means something, one that Michael will answer to every time he speaks or votes as a congressman. We’re going to promise a new level of integrity, and then we’re going to deliver it.

    Hmm….

    Towards the end:

    To date, we show you as having contributed $65.00, and being legally allowed to contribute the difference between that and $2100.00 before midnight, March 25th. The more of that you can afford to invest right now into this campaign, the better.

    I could have invested in a box of feces and realized a better return. Live and learn.

  69. Chris Moore Says:

    “Forgive me, but you are part of my problem with Mike Nelson”

    I don’t even know Mike Nelson, and every time I have made a statement, I’ve defended you. Are you pissed that I don’t answer every post made by Nelson with a defense of you? He makes a lot of posts and I don’t have the time, nor is it my fight. Are you pissed that I don’t kick him off of this site? I don’t own it. Are you pissed that I haven’t come to his house and physically shut him up? I’m non-violent. What the hell do you expect me to do about Mike Nelson other than continually defend YOU over his allegations of fraud? If you have a problem with my continual DEFENSE of you against absurd allegations, then … well … fuck you. You’re an ass and deserve no defense.

    “Certainly, had I believed we would only raise $450K, I would have budgeted differently.”

    That’s a fair defense, but I personally think it was a serious lapse of judgment to believe that you could raise $2-3 million without ever revealing a plan or giving your donors any indication that the campaign was doing anything that donors like to see. From my viewpoint, you ran a bloated campaign and failed to capitalize on many FREE media opportunities. The position papers were terribly written, the press releases (when released, which was rare) were even worse, and the plan you had was amateurish and pie-in-the-sky anyway. You were (and are) very arrogant, and you managed to piss off many donors with your arrogance. All of these criticisms have nothing to do with how much money was raised. The campaign lacked transparency EVERYWHERE, and knowing the history of the LP, you should have known that would be a problem.

    I’m not saying that it is good policy to release your strategy. I’m not saying that it is good policy to work everything on the cheap. I’m just telling you what your donor base expects. You can piss and moan about it, but it doesn’t change the fact that libertarian donors expect certain things from their campaigns, no matter how irrational. You could have given them these things, raised $1 million plus, and made a much better showing. Though, with Ankrum in the race I don’t think it was winnable anyway.

    These are my opinions and the opinions of many others. Take them for what they are worth (which is probably not very much). I’m merely spelling out the reasons why I will never donate to a campaign you are working on ever again.

  70. Roscoe Says:

    Short of an opinion audit by a CPA, hand delivered to the receipient,
    with a copy of the 2006 tax returns and W-2 forms as filed with the IRS, how is anyone to believe anything that is produced? Scammers can claim anything. The problem here is that an unbelievable amount of money was spent for such a small result. Future contributors have to take that into account rather than speculation about large salaries, under the table payments, fancy dinners, or embezzelment.

  71. Mike N. Says:

    Short of an opinion audit by a CPA, hand delivered to the receipient,
    with a copy of the 2006 tax returns and W-2 forms as filed with the IRS, how is anyone to believe anything that is produced? Scammers can claim anything.

    Oh but this will be the “Bible of Infinite Wisdom” from Lord Hacker himself. Have faith!

    Now, as soon as you send him $200k, you will be enlightened.

  72. Mike N. Says:

    From the Austin Chronicle:

    But not everybody believes Hackers’ intentions are pure. “He’s slimier than a car salesman,” said Joe Blow, donor to the Libertarian Michael Badnarik’s failed campaign for Congress which Hacker managed, leaving it saddled with $200,000 in debt. “He messed up the Badnarik campaign and now is looking for new suckers to defraud of their money and flaunt his own ego. You’d probably never even get the Bible anyway if you fell for his tricks.

    Hacker answered by declaring, “Whoever said that is a libelous swine with no proof – and they’re attacking my personal freedoms and violating the limits on speech, setting out to destroy an activity with lies and a reputation with false declarations.”

    When the Austin Chronicle asked him to respond to concerns that he mismanaged the Badnarik campaign, he replied “No. I don’t owe you any answers. But I will say the saboteur devil Mike Nelson is the primary reason why Badnarik lost, another sign of the chronic infection that has been keeping the LP anemic and unhealthy all along. Now I am starting a church to mentor the world back on the right track from the path of evil Nelson led it on and to reinforce the fact that I am the messiah for all the forces of liberty in the world.”

  73. Mike N. Says:

    From an email received recently:

    “First, the merchant account set-up on the Badnarik congressional campaign website is payable through Hacker’s outfit, the same as mentioned in connection with Scientology. I don’t know if this is recent or if it existed throughout the campaign, as I’ll explain in the next paragraph.

    You can see this for yourself by clicking on the contribute button on the Badnarik website, and reading the names of the “payable to” info. I’d first seen this only in the last couple of weeks, when I was trying to learn a little more about Hacker.

    In and of itself, there is nothing necessarily wrong with such an arrangement as Hacker now has with Badnarik’s contributions going through a Hacker company or companies. Many political consultancies offer similar services (however, it is necessary to state that in paying the inflated percentages to such merchant providers, the campaign was paying a few to several points more than in simply establishing a regular merchant account, which they could have obtained, easily, for no more than 2.29% total costs).”

  74. torah Says:

    L. Ron Hacker might have people reading his books and following his teachings, but he will go down in LP history as the worst example of a botched campaign.

    $411,000+ for 4% of the vote? No TV ads because L. Ron Hacker thought it was a “bad investment?”

    If he runs the religion like he did the campaign, he won’t have much of a following.

  75. paulie cannoli Says:

    The “419er Anthem/Chop Yo Dollar” (named after the Nigerian Penal Code section relating to advance payment scams) is sweeping the African Continent….

    http://southdrive.blogspot.com/2005/11/419er-anthem-i-go-chop-your-dollar.html

  76. paulie cannoli Says:

    http://unhappybirthday.com/

    the Happy Birthday Song is copyrighted.

  77. paulie cannoli Says:

    I go Chop your dollars video

    http://www.tlcafrica.com/I_go_chop_your_dollar1.mov

    More info

    http://helpychalk.blogspot.com/2005/10/nigerias-version-of-gangsta-rap.html

  78. paulie cannoli Says:

    More lyrics for ya…

    “When the moon is in the Seventh House
    And Jupiter aligns with Mars
    Then peace will guide the planets
    And love will steer the stars

    This is the dawning of the age of Aquarius
    The age of Aquarius
    Aquarius!
    Aquarius!

    Harmony and understanding
    Sympathy and trust abounding
    No more falsehoods or derisions
    Golden living dreams of visions
    Mystic crystal revalation
    And the mind’s true liberation
    Aquarius!
    Aquarius!

    When the moon is in the Seventh House
    And Jupiter aligns with Mars
    Then peace will guide the planets
    And love will steer the stars

    This is the dawning of the age of Aquarius
    The age of Aquarius
    Aquarius!
    Aquarius!”

  79. Allen Hacker Says:

    Chris,

    You took that far too personally. If Mike had not made the false accusations, and anyone, even he, had initiated the entire thing with a decent demeanor asking reasonable questions, I’d have answered him. But that’s not what happened, and everything on this line of discussion flows from that. I know you’ve been decent, but you and a few other good guys keep trying to cut the continuity and in effect commit a denial as to why I’ve taken the position I’ve taken. That’s a shame, and I won’t go along because the causal chain cannot be ignored.

    Since the beginning the LP has been subverted by bigmouthed small-minded people who do what they do for no valid reason or no reason at all, often only because they can and sometimes because they’re preemptively defensive and badly-behaved enough to need to be.

    We have to put an end to overextended tolerance, or it’s never going to change.

    0

  80. Allen Hacker Says:

    Hmmm….

    One guy mentions a wrong assumption in an email, another guy publishes it on a blog, people read it and add it to their blogs because they find it titillating, and soon the folks over at CompleteCampaigns.com are upset because their company is being slimed simply because of a vague similarity between company names and the lack of due diligence by the first two people in the rumor chain.

    And so it goes.

    0

  81. Mike N. Says:

    We have to put an end to overextended tolerance, or it’s never going to change.

    The beginnings of religious fanaticism… What’s next? The Lord Hacker Evangelical Hour on channel 33?

    I can hear it now… Hurricane Katrina was caused by Mike Nelson! 9/11 was caused by his evil blog comments! Come to Lord Hacker!

  82. torah Says:

    Quick, what rhymes with Dianetics?

  83. Nigel Watt Says:

    Torah: Calisthenics.

    Hacker: You’re the only one overextending my tolerance.

  84. Tom Bryant Says:

    Allen,

    Regarding your post above, that was a much better explanation of the campaign than I had previously heard. In a nutshell, you explained that you were planning to raise a lot more than 400k and thus invested most of the original 400k in infrastructure. That makes sense to me. Yeah, in hindsight, you probably shouldn’t have done that, but we live and learn. A more detailed accounting of how the money was spent would still be appreciated though.

    I don’t comment or attack Mike Nelson because I don’t think he’s that significant. He’s certainly not for me.

    The way that I see it, the campaign was not producing much in the way of campaign activity. The bill boards stopped going up, no ads were running, and yet the campaign was bringing in a lot of money. That causes folks to get suspicious.

    People started asking questions, and Mike Nelson started up his stuff with you. This is when you say that the campaign contributions started to fizzle out. However, I agree with the above posters who said the lack of campaign activity was the real start. If the campaign had ads produced, more signs up, earned media mentions, etc, the accusations of fraud and embezzlement would be obviously hollow.

    In response, you refused to account for the money. You claimed that if you showed the numbers you’d be sacrificing your principles by giving into Mike Nelson and other detractors.

    So the potential donor had this picture. The campaign brought in a ton of money. There is very little campaign activity going on. The campaign will not disclose how the money was spent.

    The above is why my donations dried up, and many more people too I would imagine.

    I think that the biggest mistake your campaign made was not investing too much into infrastructure, but refusing to open the books to keep the contributions flowing in.

  85. Stuart Richards Says:

    Quick, what rhymes with Dianetics?

    Diabetics?

    If any of you think that this uber-uncool witchhunt is going to get you anywhere you want to be is head-in-the-sand out of touch with the way things work in the world as you pervert it.

    Sure thing, daddy-o. (God that smacked of hippiedom.)

  86. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Responding to your answer in detail, Allen:

    “As for whether the money was spent wrong, one simply can’t state that one definitely, either way. Certainly, had I believed we would only raise $450K, I would have budgeted differently. I might not even have joined the campaign, because I don’t do paper candidates, I fight to win.”

    So, despite available party history showing that $100K would be an exceptional amount for a Libertarian Congressional run to raise, you recommended and enacted a budget which required nearly three times that much merely for maintenance and campaign infrastructure? This is poor budgeting, poor planning, and extremely poor research.

    “Any way you look at that race, it required at least $750K spent very well, or over $1 million at least.”

    Quite probably. This was one of the three reasons I didn’t donate myself- that I do not believe the Libertarian Party has either the organization or the popular support to win a Congressional race, even with the best candidate in the world. (The other two reasons were that I believe Badnarik is unelectable regardless of money or party support, and that I was running for office myself and couldn’t spare money for other campaigns.)

    “I still believe we would have raised the money if not for the embarrassment heaped upon us and the LP itself by false accusations of embezzlement and ongoing proof that libertarians eat their young and can’t be taken seriously.”

    One third of all money sent into the Badnarik campaign was paid to your consulting firm. You have steadfastly rejected all calls at an accounting of how your firm spent that money thus far. This does not inspire confidence. In fact, considering that Libertarian candidates have been bitten by scammers before, it raises immediate suspicion of wrongdoing and destroys trust in your services… which you have discovered.

  87. Kris Overstreet Says:

    More:

    “I can easily attribute between $100-150K or more in contributions not received to be Mike Nelson’s fault.”

    For all that he might become the new Carol Moore, Mike Nelson is but one man. You could have brought forth facts repudiating his accusations. You didn’t. Instead you merely denied his accusations and then levelled personal attacks against his character. The flat fact is that Mike Nelson has brought forth more verifiable facts on this issue than you have- which means, on the whole, I find him the more credible of the two of you.

    “I never intended to get paid unless there was a surplus available at the end, because winning would have made my day and that would have led to more than enough compensation.”

    Then why, in your most recent call for money, did you include $150,000 in your request solely to pay yourself? By your own admission there was a serious deficit, not a surplus.

    “That I, and in fact the staff as well, lived most of the campaign on bad restaurant food and fear of rent seems to have gone completely unappreciated here.”

    I’ll grant you that Chili’s isn’t all that good, but at $10-$15 per plate you make it sound as if this was barely survival-level nutrition. I can get a full day’s food at fast-food places for under $10, and I can cook myself much healthier at home for much, much less. More to the point, when I’m trying to get by on hundreds of dollars per month, someone moaning about barely being able to survive on thousands a month gets very little sympathy from me.

  88. Kris Overstreet Says:

    “The real campaign never happened, because we only got enough to build the cars, and not enough to put gas in it. Have any opinion you want about how much I spent on the car, I saw a potential $2-3 million available, and I built a car that could be driven on less than the balance of the first million. Disagree if you like, but do it for decent reasons and in a respectful manner, please.”

    Um.

    You saw $2-3 million available to support a Congressional candidate who, as a Presidential candidate, barely raised over $1 million… and, I should add, many donors to Presidential candidates don’t donate for anything else.

    You built a campaign that could barely sustain its own bloated expenses and which did very little, compared to the money it spent in toto, to actually promote the candidate.

    It sounds more and more as if you had no idea what you were doing. What you did might, or might not, have worked in a major party campaign. It deserves mentioning that your Democratic opponent raised only about $100,000 more than the Badnarik campaign did, yet spent it in a MUCH more efficient and effective manner. The 55-40-5 final result was not due merely to entrenched loyalty to the old parties: it was due, in no small part, to the effectiveness of the respective campaigns in persuading people to vote for their candidates.

  89. Kris Overstreet Says:

    Finally:

    “I will happily state in categorical terms exactly where the money went, except that the “staffing” entry will be an unitemized total. You will know exactly how much went for my expenses and how much if any went into my pocket for personal operating expenditures. But you don’t need to know, and will never know, exactly who the staffers were and how much each was paid. From what you’ve written above, you should be able to live with that.”

    Actually, no, I don’t think I can live with that. One of the main points of corruption in past political campaigns- Democrat, Republican, whatever- is nepotism, i. e. candidate family members getting paid from campaign donations regardless of any actual work done. This is even more important in your case, since the allegation has been made that your consulting firm has only one staffer- yourself.

    Furthermore, this bold denial of transparency in this issue makes it even more difficult to believe that you will be informative about other aspects of the campaign. You’re doing a very, very poor job of selling us on further donations, Allen, much less giving you any future role in any future campaigns.

    The facts which have come out about your prospective new religion certainly don’t help your case either…

  90. Kn@ppster Says:

    Quoth Allen Hacker:

    “Since the beginning the LP has been subverted by bigmouthed small-minded people who do what they do for no valid reason or no reason at all, often only because they can and sometimes because they’re preemptively defensive and badly-behaved enough to need to be.”

    It remains to be seen whether the Badnarik campaign spent its money “for no valid reason” or “for no reason at all.” Part of the reason that remains to be seen is that you’re being “preemptively defensive and badly-behaved enough to need to be.”

    “I won’t put out the information requested because the first person to request that I do so pissed me off with his tone” is an excuse, not a reason.

    Regards,
    Tom Knapp

  91. Andy Says:

    “It deserves mentioning that your Democratic opponent raised only about $100,000 more than the Badnarik campaign did, yet spent it in a MUCH more efficient and effective manner.”

    I thought that the Democrat raised a lot less than Badnarik, something like $75,000.

  92. paulie cannoli Says:

    Quick, what rhymes with Dianetics?

    Rhyme dictionary at rhymezone.com says:

    ords and phrases that rhyme with dianetics: (21 results)

    2 syllables:
    metics

    3 syllables:
    aesthetics, asthmatics, athletics, cadnetix, cognetics, cosmetics, genetics, kinetics, magnetics, odetics, phonetics, prosthetics, synthetics

    4 syllables:
    anesthetics, bionetics, diabetics, diuretics

    5 syllables:
    helionetics, intermagnetics, pharmakinetics

  93. Allen Hacker Says:

    Tom Knapp,

    You can do better than that. Your attribution that I’m saying “I won’t put out the information requested because the first person to request that I do so pissed me off with his tone”, is way off the mark.

    He did not request, he demanded as if he owned me, and that was after he accused me of crap.

    I’m beginning to see how pervasive the selective memory is around here. No wonder the LP has no institutional memory. Its self-appointed keepers are sporadic amnesiacs.

    0

  94. Allen Hacker Says:

    Kris Overstreet Says:
    December 13th, 2006 at 5:57 pm

    “No, Allen, the burden of proof is on YOU, the seller.”

    It would make more sense if you were in the same conversation I’m in. I’m talking about the burden of proof borne by the makers of accusations. You’re skipping way forward and denying by neglect that anything relevant came before.

    0

  95. Kris Overstreet Says:

    You may be talking about the burden of proof of your accusers: I am not.

    Your accusers are not asking for two hundred thousand dollars after the election is over- and after you’ve already raised four hundred thousand dollars and accomplished nothing with it.

    In fact, your accusers are challenging you to prove that you are trustworthy- that you are a good investment.

    So far, you’re proving the exact opposite.

  96. Allen Hacker Says:

    Nothing of the sort, Kris.

    I’m just hell-bent on finishing one conversation before starting another. You may be fine with glossing over one thing so you can get to another that you care about more, but it’s just not going to happen.

    0

  97. Stuart Richards Says:

    Jesus fucking Christ, Hacker, you’re a joke. Please just step away from the keyboard before you get hurt.

  98. Mike N. Says:

    Allen Hacker’s Drake = Mike Nelson:

    http://www.theagitator.com/archives/027324.php

    :)

  99. Allen Hacker Says:

    Stuart,

    Nothing of substance to contribute?

    0

  100. Chris Hickman Says:

    Mr. Hacker, when are you going to publish an accounting of what your firm did with the 1/3 of the campaign contributions it took in? Whether required by the FEC or not, I think you owe it to us as we are the same group of people from whom you are asking to donate an additional $200,000.

  101. Stuart Richards Says:

    I’ve already contributed far more substance than you ever did.

  102. Chris Moore Says:

    This is all very simple to resolve.

    Everyone that think Allen is a fraud will continue to feel that way no matter what he does. Everyone that believes Allen is not a fraud, just a bad campaign manager, will continue to feel that way no matter what he does.

    The point is, neither of those two groups will be giving Allen any money now nor in the future. We’re not going to get the money we donated back, nor should we. We’re not going to get a satisfactory (to us) explanation from Allen any time soon or ever.

    Each member of those two groups keeps making the same points, Allen keeps talking about ending one conversation first (whatever the hell that means), and the thread dissolved into a back-and-forth contest to see who is the biggest poopy-head.

    Let Allen slink quietly back to California and refrain from whacking him anymore until he tries to weasel himself onto another campaign.

  103. Nick Wilson Says:

    Allen, I will join those of us who are thanking you for your semi-explanatory post. You’ve at least answered some of the questions. Now if you’d please answer the rest and open the books, I’d be glad to stop calling you names and start offering constructive criticism. You see, it’s hard for us to offer constructive criticism when we have nothing to construct it on. So your whines about us leveling baseless accusations at you are you own fault and not ours.

    Your religion is an issue primarily because the Scientologist tradition is rife with fraud and scam artists, more so than almost any other religion in the world as far as I know. Throwing that on top of your evasion and your still very disgusting egotism strengthens our basis for making harsh personal attacks at your integrity. At least in the aforementioned post you finally express a bit of humility. As SVD hopefully learned, that can go a long ways.

    So let the criticism begin:

    “I might not even have joined the campaign, because I don’t do paper candidates, I fight to win.”

    Really? I haven’t seen any evidence of successful political campaigns on your resume. In fact I haven’t seen evidence of campaigns at all other than Badnarik’s.

    “Michael becoming demoralized by so many potential repeat contributors asking him to defend against false allegations a la the “beating your wife” question.”

    Mike Nelson’s “sabotage” had nothing to do with Badnarik and everything to do with you, as far as I remember. The whole thing was “If you fire Hacker, we’ll give you money,” which means that Nelson was not necessarily COSTING Badnarik money – he was merely forcing Badnarik to choose between the opportunity costs of keeping a campaign manager many people saw as corrupt and the amount of money that manager could bring in, or gaining access to an alternative pool of donors who would be more satisfied if Badnarik found a different manager.

    That you took it personally is not surprising, and that you convinced Badnarik to stick with you is not surprising either with you there to influence him of Mike Nelson’s “sabotage.”

    ASSUMING that Mike Nelson cost the campaign $100,000 or more, what that ACTUALLY means is that that $100,000 or more worth of donors who decided not to pay Badnarik – solely because he chose to keep his campaign manager over the concerns of these potential donors – WOULD have paid Badnarik that money had he fired you. In economics, this is called opportunity costs, and unless the amount of money you personally raised after people were convinced by Mike Nelson not to donate was still more than the amount that Mike Nelson cost you, theoretically it was YOU who cost the campaign the net difference. The higher amount of costs to the campaign you set on Mike’s shoulders, the more obvious it is that Badnarik should have fired you and he would have made more money.

    Or at least you should have disproven Mike Nelson instead of getting all personal about it and run an effective campaign on the money you had. You did none of the above things, so even if Mike was completely wrong about you, you only reinforced all of his points, especially the fact that Badnarik should have fired you, and thus dug your own grave.

    Because you chose to attack Mike instead of answering his “rudeness” and everyone’s resulting questions with substantial arguments for your integrity, open books and real results coming from the campaign, you are the primary reason why Mike Nelson won credibility with everyone else and why you are standing alone now. It doesn’t matter how much his rudeness offended you – I don’t like Mike much, and think he can be incredibly juvenile at times – but you out-juveniled him and looked like a fraudster to everyone at the same time because of your secrecy and evasion.

    The fact that you’ve dug yourself into such a hole is saddening, and your egotism makes it even more saddening. This is not even getting into the basic issue of your complete ineptness as a campaign manager, right out of your own mouth ($2-3 million? Are you even serious!? Anyway, even if Mike N. only cost you $100-150K, how does that number plus $430K add up to $2-3 million?)

    You’re human, and you’re neither the messiah nor our “mentor.” Socrates would be ashamed. You failed miserably, and once you quit pretending that you didn’t and blaming Mike N. for it all, maybe we can look back at the campaign, take some real lessons away from it and be better off in the long term.

  104. Mike N. Says:

    I am flattered that some think my comments on blogs are so powerful. It is rather comical really.

  105. Mike N. Says:

    “I don’t need your money personally. Any day, I can start a new business and make a million dollars in a year. I’ve done it twice, will do it again as soon as I’ve shed the shackles of this campaign.” — Allen Hacker

  106. Mike N. Says:

    It is a little strange that someone who supposedly is a millionaire whines about “living in shared-housing poverty for the last 15 months” in his plea for $200k to write some bogus report.

  107. Austin Cassidy Says:

    Chris Moore’s comments nailed it on this subject, I think. It’s time to move on to more positive matters.

  108. Allen Hacker Says:

    Nick,

    I’ve been saying all along that everything will b answered, just on my timetable and not yours. So why do you keep ignoring that? You keep sking the same question as though you can’t read.

    Austin,

    Moving on to more positive matters is fine with me if it can be done.

    Maybe you can lead the way with a more positive headline next time.

    0

  109. Stuart Richards Says:

    Hey, don’t blame Austin. I’m the guy that wrote the article. I stand behind it wholeheartedly, and I take responsibility for it. Pin the blame on the right guy-Austin’s only defended you.

    At any rate, I agree. We’ve pretty much exhausted this vein. I think we’ve all said everything that’s useful to say.

  110. Chris Hickman Says:

    Allen, are you going to reply to my post someday?

  111. Tom Bryant Says:

    Anyone catch this yet?

    http://www.insolitology.com/topten/koostrenite/ri-922i.htm

    Telepathic auditing thingamagig.

    [Allen Hacker:]
    “I was the Emperor [in a distant past] of this Galaxy that we are dwelling in at present.”

  112. Chris Moore Says:

    OK. You guys have way too much time, and are way too into Allen Hacker.

  113. Mike N. Says:

    ROFL! Holly shit that Galactic Emperor shit is way too funny!

  114. Nick Wilson Says:

    Allen, I was making a point that you choose to ignore and divert attention away from: the more weight you put on Mike Nelson’s shoulder for the campaign’s failure, the more Badnarik should have fired you and he would have raised more money from the people who weren’t giving to him because of you. I would be interested to hear a response, Lord Emperor sir.

  115. What fools these mortals be « paulie cannoli Says:

    [...] Allen Hacker is the topic of a Free State Project Forum thread: [...]

  116. What fools these mortals be « Last Free Voice Says:

    [...] Allen Hacker is the topic of a Free State Project Forum thread: [...]