Online Gambling

ReasonTV: Wayne Allyn Root Explains How He Will Become President

|

At FreedomFest 2011, Reason's Matt Welch sat down with Wayne Allyn Root to talk about his media plans and presidential aspirations. Root said "America cares about jobs number one, jobs number two, jobs number three, jobs number ten thousand…". He beleives that America is focused on the economy and not as much on the social issues such as online gambling.

Held each July in Las Vegas, FreedomFest is attended by around 2,000 libertarians and advocates of limited government. Reason.tv spoke with over two dozen speakers and attendees and will be releasing interviews over the coming weeks. For an ever-growing playlist, go here now.

About 7 minutes. Shot by Zach Weissmueller and Jim Epstein and edited by Sharif Matar.

Go to reason.tv for downloadable versions, and subscribe to our YouTube Channel to receive notifications when new material goes live.

Advertisement

NEXT: Update on Arthur Alan Wolk's Lawsuit Against Reason

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. You could’ve just posted the headline alone.

    It was enough to make me chuckle.

  2. Fusionism: The dysfunctional marriage where conservatives come home drunk and beat their libertarian spouses, then show up with flowers and promises when they lose their job.

    1. “Poor Mrs. Dondero. Another black eye…”

    1. This completely “meh” post is the perfect excuse to comment on the post below. Eff that guy.

      BTW, has it ever been disclosed which posters here were named? It’d be hilarious to hear them announce some of these names in court.

      1. has it ever been disclosed which posters here were named?

        Yeah, “pseudonymous Hit & Run commenters,” i.e. everybody.

        1. I followed a couple links to a redacted printout, and felt shame that I had no comments with a black line through them.

          1. John’s typos are now on his permanent record.

  3. I’m no expert on this, but wouldn’t Section 230 immunity protect the foundation from most litigation based on user comments?

    1. Sorry, that was a response to goober1223. And I don’t mean to open the door to a lot of comments on the litigation–Reason has every, well, reason to want to avoid this nonsense.

      1. In the interest of saying my piece and THEN agreeing with the sentiment that this is the wrong article to post on and Reason has every right to stop etc. etc. This type of thing can seriously harm the 1a. I must say that Reason has done a comendable thing by standing on their principles(no shock there) and that the purpose of 1a is for speach WE DONT LIKE…not the speach we do like. It is unfortunate that resources must be spent defending this kind of thing.

        Ohh, and “BAD WARTY!”

        1. “Fuck off. Did you expect us to give a shit about some shitbag politician lawyer?”

        2. Did anonopussy’s post just get deleted?

          1. I think I “threaded it” out of line. Didn’t look at the OP handle prior to responding.

            1. Bwah ha ha, I can’t believe “INTERNET BLOGGER Latter Day Taint” was named in a lawsuit.

    2. Not against Warty. He LOOMS.

      So, who among the peanut gallery did he sue?

      1. They’re listed as defendants under their commenting names.

        1. Damn, that’s almost a roll call for here. Were you sick that day, ProL?

          1. It’s not my style to say the things that got everyone into trouble.

            Though I suppose Episiarch could sue me for something pizza-related.

            1. Such as Wolk’s complaint being the reason why there is a rule 11?

            2. Every time he talks about food, I remember the line from Goodfellas “I order linguine with marinara, I get egg noodles with ketchup…”

              Wait a minute. Italian food… coke… more coke… sleeping with coked out chicks…

              Shit! Episiarch is Henry Hill!

              1. Mein Gott! I am absolutely convinced. It even explains the move to Seattle.

            3. It’s not my style to say write the things that got could get everyone into trouble.

        2. Holy shit, how awesome. I LOOM LARGE

        3. INTERNET BLOGGER “Latter Day Taint”
          INTERNET BLOGGER “Shari Lewis”

          I fucking lost it. This is too much.

        4. I especially like “protefeed”

          1. aw shit, how did I miss the post right below?

            1. This actually happened to me twice in this thread.

      2. Not me. But I don’t recall speculating about interspecies relations, either. Professional courtesy, I guess.

      3. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA he spelled Prolefeed’s name wrong! From now on he shall be known as “Protefeed”

      4. It can’t be overstated how awesome it is for the Rason Staff and friends to fight the disclosure stuff. (makes me want to be a better commenter) I should uncancel my subscription (joke) and donate more. Also, some of us are behind proxies and the like so I am sure they would have some trouble narrowing it down (in my case I have told them who I am before, for different stuff but I mean the truly anons on here).

        This post is about WAR, I like his hair.

        1. I think he’s wearing a better tie than Matt is in this video.

          1. I was once very open about my identity. It makes me sad I missed that thread. I also should donate, but last time I tried my internet kept timing out. I’ll probably try again in a bit.

  4. Hypothetically if one were tone frivolously sued in California wouldn’t one have recourse to make a hefty return from SLAPP?

  5. Wayne Allen Root can sense the distress of nearby sheep.

  6. As an aside, my conspiracy hat tells me that the placement of this WAR piece was to draw fire from “previous post/s” and eschew focus on this piece itself…back to tuning in static on the microwave now.

  7. I resisted the urge to post something about a topic not directly related to the matter incorporated in this post.

    I’m better than you.

    Nyah

    nyah

    nyah.

    1. You were probably only saved by your steadfast, admirable refusal to kneel before threaded comments.

      1. I, hypocritcally, support this.

  8. Here are the commenters listed as defendants:

    INTERNET BLOGGER “TheZeitgeist”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “AA W”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Protefeed”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Douglas Fletcher”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “flye”
    and
    INTERNET BWGGER “Fun Fact”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Warty”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “The Gobbler”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “John”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “fbI”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Mr . Weebles”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “planodoc”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Latter Day Taint”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “waffies”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “troy”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Mr Whipple”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Spencer Smith”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Shari Lewis”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “hmm”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Not Arthur Wolk”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Barely Suppressed Rage” :
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “Amakudari”
    and
    INTERNET BLOGGER “gryUiade”

    1. There was also someone referred to as WIKIPEDIA USER “Boo the Puppy”.

    2. I think this calls for an “I am Spartacus” moment.

    3. Wow! These are crazy internet times we live in. I mean really! LOL

      Jess
      http://www.anymouse.com

      1. ANON-BOT!!!! You’re back!!! I missed you anon-bot.

        1. I wish anon-bot had been named in the lawsuit. Hell, that would’ve put a smile on my face.

          1. That would’ve been glorious.

    4. I do my goddamn best to inflame and insult, but can’t even make the “wall of shame.” *sadface*

      Guess I’ll have to try harder.

      1. *sigh* I know your pain…

  9. Shari Lewis? That hypocrite; like she never tried it.

  10. I notice there’s no attribution on this blog entry….

  11. The fact that I didn’t know I was being sued until after I was done being sued is…confusing.

  12. You know who else disabled comments on “sensitive” matters?

    1. Pauly Krugnuts?

  13. I didn’t know I was being sued until after I was done being sued

    Pseudonymity FTW!!!

  14. The dude does have point : Gary Jonhson ”legalize Drugs” campaign just got drown.

    In contrast Ron Paul economy and constitution platform is still going strong.

    1. That’s true, but I am definitely not comfortable with that stance (and with Root himself) and I don’t see how can anyone stand up for freedom, especially on principle, and ignore one thing while promoting another. Even Ron Paul emphasizes that liberty is not some piecemeal thing.

      While economic issues certainly affect more people in general, the severity of the restrictions and penalties on social issues are always much worse. You can be negatively affected economically and still get on with life, still find opportunity. But if you’re on the short end of the stick on any number of social/non-economic issues, your life is over.

      1. Please explain the life being over thing. Are you saying so many people are so wedded to social, non-economic issues that they might as well die if they can’t have it their way? How about some contemporary examples?

        1. No, I’m saying it is because of how few are immediately affected that law makers at state and federal level can get away greater levels of criminalization or severity. Look at alcohol prohibition–it didn’t and couldn’t last long because of the large number of people affected. But look at the War on Drugs and long that’s been able to last since 1937 for MJ (and everything else).

          This isn’t about people who “might as well die if they can’t have it their way”. If you have a felony conviction for all intents and purposes, your life is heretofore over. This is the result of people having it their way with other people’s lives rather with than their own. We say the same about economic issues, that we don’t want other people to have their way with our money, so why not apply the same principle to non-economic issues as well?

          you asked for some examples (reason’s commenting system is limited to two links, so I can’t provide many):
          – as was mentioned above, online gambling; anything related to illicit trade or personal exchange; or heck, nearly anywhere the interstate commerce clause is used today

          – Drugs; again, any jail time or felony conviction means your salaried or professional career is done; looking for many types of work afterward becomes nearly impossible after a background check

          – Many matters dealing with sex
          – see how this guy’s life is turning out:
          https://reason.com/blog/2011/07…..e-my-victi
          there’s much more related, just search reason
          – others include the PROTECT Act (USC 1466a)

          – obscenity laws (again, felony; see for example Paul Little recently, 2 years federal prison; Jesus Castillo, Mike Diana, prison.. for comics)

          – DMCA – bypassing DRM is again a felony (only recently last year they made an exception for phones); ridiculous expansion of computer fraud/tampering laws

          – Security, Terrorism:
          – see case of warrantless GPS tracking by FBI of student Yasir Afifi, who first posted on unknown-looking device on reddit
          http://www.npr.org/2011/09/07/…..of-america
          – once a suspect, always a suspect; turns up in background checks; always on file everywhere you go, despite being clearly innocent
          A commander with the Bloomington police said these reports would be kept on file for decades. When Qureshi found out that the 11-page report reading “suspicious person” would be kept that long, his eyes filled with tears.

  15. I think my billing should have been ahead of John and Warty’s. But I will settle for beating out Boo the Puppy.

  16. Suck it, Root

  17. Wow, Nick and I now have something in common besides a unibrow.

  18. I’m sorry, but I just have to poison the well here.

    This is the guy who said former Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak was a-ok, because his (Wayne’s) businessman buddy in Egypt said so.

    You’re welcome.

    1. I’m sorry, but I just have to poison the well here.

      Don’t be. Among most of the commenters round these parts, that well is already radioactive.

  19. Deleting my post that listed sued commenters? Really?

    1. Ha! They think you’re no better than rectal.

      1. Shut up Shari.

        1. Don’t worry. I’ll give you even money that all the comments on this post end up getting wiped. Poor Root, man can’t catch a break.

    2. Disapointing. I can’t seem to access the pdf. I wanted to see if anonbot got sued.

    3. Yes, really. Please note what it says at the top of every comments string, particularly the last sentence:

      “We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time.”

      This litigation has been a serious pain in the ass, and a drag on both our time and our pocketbook. After a long battle, we preserved our right to say what we said, and say more about the matter as we see fit. In doing so, we asked commenters to please hold off on doing their usual goat-dance on this particular subject matter, for reasons that would probably be obvious to my 3-year-old. Even me typing this comment right now is costing me time I’d rather be spending on more productive pursuits. If we have to, we’ll just shut down comments altogether. Seriously, people, take it somewhere else.

      1. It would be nice if there was a free speech post that did NOT refer to any friends of goats. We could go on and on about how litigiousity is harming free speech more than the government.

        I’m with Cliche Bandit on this one. This whole thing makes me want to extend my subscription and make a goddamn donation.

  20. 16. Defendants, TheZeitgeist, AA W, Protefeed, Douglas Fletcher, flye, Fun Fact, Warty, The Gobbler, John, fbi, Mr. Weebles, planodoc, Latter Day Taint, waffles, troy, Mr Whipple, Spencer Smith, Shari Lewis, hmm, Not Arthur Wolk, Barely Suppressed Rage, Amakudari, grylliade, and Boo the Puppy, are bloggers, some or all of whom are believed and therefore averred to be Pennsylvania residents, who the defendants either incited to post on their websites scandalous, heinous, false and defamatory statements about the plaintiff or are the defendants themselves, their agents, servants, principals, employees or co-conspirators, and whose identities Reason and the other defendants have conspired to protect and refuse to provide to plaintiff after inquiry.

    Are all legal documents this full of crazy?

    1. Legal question: Was this read aloud in court? Because, if so, how the fuck do you say “Latter Day Taint” in open court with a straight face?

      1. Uh, it didn’t even get to court, so no it wasn’t read aloud.

        1. Damn, I’m happy for Reason that it’s over, but that would’ve been epic.

        2. You’re taking your bitch-slapping well.

          1. Hahaha, what’s that? You got banned? Oh I don’t give a fuck!

  21. 16. Defendants, TheZeitgeist, AA W, Protefeed, Douglas Fletcher, flye, Fun Fact,
    Warty, The Gobbler, John, fbi, Mr. Weebles, planodoc, Latter Day Taint, waffles, troy, Mr. Whipple, Spencer Smith, Shari Lewis, hmm, Not Arthur Wolk, Barely Suppressed Rage, Amakudari, grylliade, and Boo the Puppy, are bloggers, some or all of whom are believed and therefore averred to be Pennsylvania residents, who the defendants either incited to post on their websites scandalous, heinous, false and defamatory statements about the plaintiff or are the defendants themselves, their agents, servants, principals, employees or co-conspirators, and whose identities Reason and the other defendants have conspired to protect and refuse to provide
    to plaintiff after inquiry

  22. seriously, read the complaints in the pdf. REASON IS DANGEROUS AND RACIST YALL!

    are also hodgepodge of the super
    rich, all are subscribers to the principles such as they are of The Libertarian movement, no
    Government, no regulation of banks, insurance companies or financial institutions, no interest
    9
    Case ID: 110702615 rate caps on student loans, consumer loans, home mortgages, no limitations on phony financial
    derivatives and hedge funds from which many of the trustees made their fortunes and anti-Israel,
    anti-Semitic policies so as not to, as they see it, pollute the purity of their party

  23. 358. Plaintiff is the author of a book for adults and children entitled Recollections of
    My Puppy, a book about raising a Golden Retriever puppy all the proceeds from which go to
    animal shelters. An excerpted copy of the book is attached and marked as Exhibit “20”.
    359. By falsely accusing Plaintiff of heinous crimes the defendants have eliminated
    any chance of that book being marketed to children, attending book signings a t schools or places
    where children congregate.

    One of the purposes of the defendants’ conduct was to invade plaintiff’s privacy,
    interfere with every aspect of plaintiff’s life, impact his charitable activities, and preventing him
    from interacting with others to promote and sell his book for charity

  24. 268. The defendants are attempting to extort something of value from the plaintiff, his
    reputation to enhance the visibility and credibility of their websites and to use that destruction as
    a means to obtain more illegal tax deductible contributions.
    269. They are continuing to libel him so they can cause him to sue them, and thus
    make them appear as victims on the internet and thus enhance and encourage others to contribute
    to their tort reform causes.
    270. The defendants want to publish the sorrow of their plight being sued repeatedly
    for their libel so their membership can blog more and more hate against the plaintiff.
    271. The hatred they wish to incite, as they have done so many times before, is
    apparent in the resulting unfounded and false charges. (See Exhibi t ” I 0″).
    272. As a direct result of this incitement plaintiff must carry a deadly weapon for his
    own protection, must increase the security around his home and family and must take other steps
    to insure that defendants and their nut ball disciples don’ t carry out their implicit threats.
    273. Plaintiffs entire lifestyle has been altered by the willful deliberate and intention
    attempt to extort from him something they will never get, his unwillingness to fight internet
    bullies to protect his reputation

    1. Ha ha ha, wow. This is what I’d expect if LoneWacko sued me. This gentleman sounds just as “unique”.

    2. Who’s he calling “nut ball disciples”? I think we should sue.

    3. They are continuing to libel him so they can cause him to sue them, and thus
      make them appear as victims on the internet and thus enhance and encourage others to contribute

      Ah, the “quit hitting yourself” defense.

  25. You can sue people for being mean on the internet now?

  26. I’ll be honest with you. I don’t like that look in Wayne Allyn Root’s eyes one bit.

  27. Pennsylvania Constitution, Art. I, Sec 7:

    “The printing press shall be free to every person who may undertake to examine the proceedings of the Legislature or any branch of government, and no law shall ever by made to restrain the right thereof. The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the invaluable rights of man, and every citizen may freely speak, write and print on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that liberty. No conviction shall be had in any prosecution for the publication of papers relating to the official conduct of officers or men in public capacity, or to any other matter proper for public investigation or information, where the fact that such publication was not maliciously or negligently made shall be established to the satisfaction of the jury; and in all indictments for libels the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.”

  28. OK wow that looks like it might jsut work. Very cool indeed.

    http://www.anon-surfing.it.tc

  29. Although I’m in the Ron Paul camp, I’m certainly happy to see Root seriously thinking about seeking the Libertarian nomination. If the GOP are once again foolish enough NOT to nominate Ron Paul, Root will certainly have my vote in 2012. Perry, Romney and the other GOP candidates are unacceptable alternatives to Barack Obama.

  30. Sorry. I’ve been voting straight LP since 1980. I’ve certainly not been above voting for straight-out goofballs. But if that goofball WAR gets the nod (or, honestly, if Paul would somehow get the Rep. nomination), my string will be broken.

    1. If you were waiting for the right time to your LP voting streak, 2008 would’ve been the year.

      1. I accidentally the verb.

  31. Root is more neo-con than Romney, Bush, Palin, and Bachman combined. I have read his books. He seems like a Glen Beck sort of creature. A golem, constantly moving into the limelight and back into the shadows again, and at no time ever arguing from first principles. What a weasel!!!

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.