Origin of the Term - "LibberToon"


http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rpf_2/message/190
http://whitenationalist.org/forum/sh...=2224#post2224


Quote Originally Posted by Dean Chambers

At 02:06 PM 05/20/2000 -0400, you wrote:

>I've infected the LPUS list with the term LibberToon...now this character
>(see his comment at bottom) realizes he's been responding to several posts
>all carrying the term in the subject line. 'Toons are just too easy to have
>fun with.
>
.

I didn't originate the term "LibberToon." Several years ago, a friend
was trying to resist me pressuring him to sign on as a precinct committeeman
in Springfield Missouri so I could resurrect the LP there after Bill Johnson
left. So in response to my pressuring him, he said, "If I tell my wife
that I've become a 'LibberToonian,' then she will ask me if I have become
tired of sleeping with her and now want to sleep with other men." When
he coined the word, he grinned, and kept on bringing the matter up of
how I was faring with the "LibberToonians." I would look askanse the
first couple of times, but it got to where it was apparrent that he had
a point, and so I never got him to join the LibberToons. After all,
I couldn't very well convince him to join a political party which had
just ratified "same-sex" marriage and rail at him for referring to
the LibberToons as LibberToons. He had his own way of resisting
LibberToonianism, and that was simply to not have anything to do with
them.

(I recruited quite a few new members, only to have them turn
on me later in 1996. One of those people were the "Typical LibberToons"
described in my original article by that name. [Well, they bought a
membership from me, then both of them voted to disallow proxies from
their fellow members in the 7th Congressional district and then upon
a new method of voting other than one-man, one vote, so that I ended
up losing my seat on the Executive Committee. Nine people present,
three of them my supporters & one weak, majority rule was used so that
five of them voted that everyone could vote twice instead of once,
therefore I lost to the Springfield bunch by five to four votes.
LibberToonian democracy in action = vote fraud.])


He didn't show any sympathy for me being thrown out of the Missery
LibberToons, either, saying, "Well, have you finally had enough of
'them LibberToons'?"

This guy values his privacy a lot, so I will not give him credit for
coining the term directly. He has had enough of the sell-out Repubs,
though, and has given up on them as well. Pity, because he was a very
very good organizer of meetings and knew everyone in the 2d Amendment
community. I can ask him who voted for what 'gun law' and he can usually
tell me, often right out of the top of his head. He is not usually sly,
but he did come up with an appropriate nickname for LibberToons, one which
fit. A LibberToon, or even someone involved with fighting with LibberToons,
couldn't have come up with that nickname, but someone from the outside
spotted it in a second, and coined the phrase.

LibberToons, as you noticed, usually don't have enough sense to
comprehend the whole message. They get into a rage about someone making
fun of their political religion which makes a sacrement of their "freedom
of choice" to choose degeneracy and forget to change the subject header.
They can go for twenty, thirty messages before they figure out that they
have screwed up and spread the new terminology and given assent to the
characterization. Then they are feeling too foolish to admit that they
screwed up. The stuff by the LibberToon below you sent is a case in
point.

Thomas Hobbes, in "Leviathan" wrote that ". . . There is nothing so
absurd that it can not be found in a book of philosophy." LibberToons,
as philo-sophists -- lovers of witless and inane philosophy for its own
sake -- probably can only sense why they are held in contempt by the
masses, who are largely immune to their rationalized silliness. Yes,
the LibberToons are the originators and main users of the Internet e-mail
political listserver. They are also the main [self] abusers of this
medium as well. Thus they will never, ever be able to form a rational
political party, the acme of the "art of the possible" because they are
chaotic self-serving anarchists unable to relate to the common man's
needs. A normal everyday person looking at the chaos asks himself,
"What is in it for me?" He figures out that there is nothing in it for
him, and so he departs. I still can recall the question a reporter asked
me after the chaos of the Sept. 1995 Platform Convention, "Where do you
get these people?" I was tempted to say "From under slimy rocks" but I
responded that every single one of them came out of the learning factories
that are modern colleges and universities, and that they all bear the
marks of the institutions that shaped them, rage as they might against
their intellectual mothers. Few, if any, were what I would call 'normal.'

See: http://www2.mo-net.com/~mlindste/proxymad.html
http://whitenationalist.org/lindstedt/proxymad.html


A revolution doesn't need the common man, but a political party always
does.

Well, I'll send this to the "Libertarian Reformers" lp2000 listserver,
(question, what will they call it after Nov. 2000?) and see if it gets
bounced back. I like to test to see how much tolerance for criticism they
can take from one of their adversaries. It's akin to testing pavlovian
responses to negative, but realistic, stimili.


--Martin Lindstedt
Missouri Reform Party Candidate for U.S. Senator


Originally posted Sat May 20, 2000 11:14 pm