Video: City Clerk Refuses to Allow “Nobody” in Mayoral Race

September 10, 2009 by Ian
Filed under: Hypocrisy, News, Video

Last week I had a chat with Keene’s city clerks Patti Little, Bill Dow, and the assistant city attorney about their challenge to my voter’s registration. The episode, some highlights of which you can see in the Ridley Report below, turned into a perfect example of how even if you think you know what their rules say, it’s only their interpretation that matters.

I filed for my candidacy for mayor as Ian “Nobody” Bernard. That’s my slave name with a nickname of “Nobody” added to the middle. Bill Dow The publicly announced purpose of this campaign was to give voters the first opportunity ever to actually choose Nobody, rather than the lesser of two evils. (As I would not take the oath of office or attend council meetings.) Clearly, the establishment did not appreciate this and immediately set to disqualifying me from the ballot. They decided on attacking my voter registration, which hadn’t seemed to be a problem before. The assistant city clerk Bill Dow, a very nice man, sent me the following letter and email:

It has been noticed that your voter registration record on file in the Keene City Clerk’s office indicates that your residence address is listed as 39 Central Square #313. It is our understanding that the residence address you provided on your voter registration form dated 11/28/2008 is not a legal domicile as defined by NH Statute which states:

Mail boxes are insufficient for purposes of establishing domicile as defined by RSA 654:1,I, which defines domicile as “that one place where a person, more than any other place, has established a physical presence…” This definition is further clarified by RSA 654:7, the statutory Voter Registration Form, which states that “A domicile is that place, more than any other, where I sleep most nights of the year…”

NH Statute requires that a voter domicile affidavit be filled out when a voter’s legal domicile is in question by an election official. Please come to the Keene City Clerk’s Office and fill out a voter domicile affidavit, no later than Monday, September 07, 2009 or your name will be removed from the declarations of filings list for the 2009 Municipal Primary and the process for removing your name from the voter checklist will follow.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at the Office of the City Clerk.

Sincerely,
William S. Dow
Records Manager/Deputy City Clerk

They sent along a “domicile affadavit”, but as I know government people like to request more information than they are required to by their rules, I decided to have a look at their statutes to see what should have been on the form. Indeed there were some differences. I printed out the domicile affadavit from their own website, but did not fill in the street on which I live. It was my understanding that anyone who lives in NH can vote so long as they affirm they live in a certain geopolitically designated physical area. (In order to be a candidate in a municipal election in Keene, one must need only be a registered voter.) In this case, I was willing to affirm that I live within the designation known as “Ward 4″ in Keene. Even though the clerk admitted that a homeless man could write in a general location and that would be accepted, she insisted I be treated differently and demanded my home address.

Of course, their own definition of domicile in 654:7 says, “A domicile is that place, more than any other, where I sleep most nights of the year, or to which I intend to return after a temporary absence. As you can see, Bill Dow did not cite the alternative definition, nor did the city attorney accept it. He claims the definition of domicile is actually in 654:1:

An inhabitant’s domicile for voting purposes is that one place where a person, more than any other place, has established a physical presence and manifests an intent to maintain a single continuous presence for domestic, social, and civil purposes relevant to participating in democratic self-government.

To me, it seems “Ward 4″ should be sufficient to meet that definition. It is a “place” wherein I’ve established a presence. Since a homeless person’s domicile can be a geographic area, it’s clear I’m being discriminated against and targeted.

It’s no secret where I live but I did not want to obey her arbitrary demand for this information. Upon request, she informed me that it was only the incumbent Dale Pregent and I who were vying for the mayoral seat. I said it’d be a shame for him to be unopposed, and she claimed to agree, but she sure did everything she could to prevent Nobody from offering some competition. As you’ll see in the video, I made the offer to give her the info she wanted if she’d affirm they will allow my nickname of “Nobody” on the ballot. (Here in Keene it’s common to see nicknames in municipal elections.) She didn’t want to answer the question, but I pressed on and got her to admit that they would not allow the nickname of “Nobody”. The attorney claimed I’d need the nickname for five years and when asked what if I wait five years, they claimed they’d still disqualify it as a “slogan”.

I refused to assent, they refused to accept my domicile affadavit, and Patti claimed they’d be disqualifying me from the ballot and begin the “process” of un-registering me to vote. They also said they’d be targeting anyone with a voter’s registration located at the UPS Store on Central Sq.

Did I really expect them to allow “Nobody” on the ballot? Not really – then there’d be a real chance Nobody could win!

So, should I launch a write-in campaign? Patti admitted that it would take some time for their “process” of removing me from the voter rolls, so by the time of the primary, I’d likely still be listed. (Patti’s letter to me notifying of my removal from the primary ballot informed me that the “checklist supervisors” would give me the “opportunity to qualify your domicile” prior to my removal from the voter rolls, so who knows how long this removal process will take.) It only takes ten write-in votes at the primary to nominate someone. Since Pregent is unopposed, unless someone else gets more write-ins than I, that should qualify me to run against him in the general election. Of course, that presumes they don’t find some other way to disallow me. (We’d probably need to send people to watch the vote counting to be sure they weren’t ignoring the write-ins.) Obviously they won’t allow the nickname, but perhaps I should just run as my slave name and hope people get the word that a vote for me is a vote for Nobody! What do you think? Please post your thoughts in the comments.

http://georgedonnelly.com George Donnelly

Who'da thunk it?
http://www.dooms-day-device.com Puke

God bless democracy: where nobody wins.
http://www.freemindsmedia.org Zeus

Does not surprise me in the slightest. And even though you won't play their games and jump through their hoops maybe a few others will step forward and do so as to shed more light on the whole process and how far they're willing to go to keep pro-liberty candidates from entering. Not that I'd expect any of them to win even if the process was run fairly.

btw: Nice mask.
Anonymous

Write-in campaign? That's what Ficus for Congress had to do once the clerk denied the paperwork.
http://libertytiger.blogspot.com William Pearson

I barely got past "democratic self-government." Really? You can have democracy or you can have self-government. Their laws don't make any sense. How can we follow them?

Good job, Nobody. I guess you can try again in 5 years.
Peacemaker

Brilliant! Genuis! Thanks NOBODY!!!
Andrew

Ian, what about temporarily changing your politically designated meaningless government name to Nobody? Then they would have to let "Nobody" run.
http://no1984blog.com Slim

That lady is very demanding. Do this, do that, hop on one leg with a blindfold on, etc…
http://www.freestateproject.org Keith

Ian,

If Ian is your slave name, does it offend you if I call you that? Why don't you rename your first name? BTW, I thought your mom and dad gave you the name. Did they make you slaves or where they slaves too?

Needless to say, I'm confused by the way you write.
http://freetalklive.com/ Ian

They are also slaves. It is "Ian Bernard" that is the slave name.

I've considered changing it to Nobody. Haven't done much more than consider though.
http://freetalklive.com/ Ian

I do not like asking permission, after all, but that would be pretty cool.
http://georgedonnelly.com George Donnelly

I found that curious, too, Keith. Is Ian a Muslim now? Was there a jailhouse conversion? Ian X?
elee3

Who is that masked man?
The lord

Alright, lets start calling Ian Freeman by the callsign nobody from here on. That way he may fulfill one more criteria next time he runs as nobody.
http://freetalklive.com/ Ian

Please re-read the post. Even if I use "Nobody" for five years they will still disqualify it as a "slogan".
Dan

That government bureaucrat was just so EAGER with the "5 years" thing. You could tell he really enjoyed laying down that arbitrary law and disqualifying someone.
http://soundclick.com/thinkliberty thinkliberty

If you want to change things you need to get involved with politics and run for office to make a difference.

Unless they don't allow you to run for office.
Andrew

Ian, your parentally provided name seems to have very little significance to you. I believe changing your name to "Nobody" would render your government name even less personal significance. I hate asking permission myself, but I think asking for permission to change your name to Nobody would make for great video. First, asking a judge to change your name to "Nobody" and then running as "Nobody". Hilarious!

Government Name: Nobody

Personal Name: Ian Freeman
http://soundclick.com/thinkliberty thinkliberty

If Ian changed his name to "nobody" using Ian on the ballot would be considered an illegal slogan.
Sams Dad

I wonder what rules/laws these bureaucrats would throw at "Cher" if she lived in Keene and she wanted to run for a public office. The only name on her US passport is "Cher" and she never changed her legal name from when she was married to Sony Bono. Sony was the elected mayor of the California town he lived in and Sony is not his legal name either.

John Wayne never went by his legal name, Marion Morrison, as an adult either in or out of film. He also went by the name of Duke with the closest of his friends and acquaintances.

I guess the Duke and Cher would never have been able to live and work in Keene.
Brad

As usual, Ian, I am confused about what you're actually trying to accomplish. But playing along….

Why don't you change your name to "No one"?

They can't deny that Noone is a legitimate name, although maybe they'd have problems with the space.
http://freetalklive.com/ Ian

Brad, the purpose was to give voters a "none of the above" option. Hence the nickname, "Nobody".

The name change is under consideration.
AnAmazedReader

From "Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave":

"On one of the hottest days of the month of August, 1833, Bill Smith, William Hughes, a slave named Eli, and myself, were engaged in fanning wheat. Hughes was clearing the fanned wheat from before the fan. Eli was turning, Smith was feeding, and I was carrying wheat to the fan. The work was simple, requiring strength rather than intellect; yet, to one entirely unused to such work, it came very hard. About three o'clock of that day, I broke down; my strength failed me; I was seized with a violent aching of the head, attended with extreme dizziness; I trembled in every limb. Finding what was coming, I nerved myself up, feeling it would never do to stop work. I stood as long as I could stagger to the hopper with grain. When I could stand no longer, I fell, and felt as if held down by an immense weight. The fan of course stopped; every one had his own work to do; and no one could do the work of the other, and have his own go on at the same time.

Mr. Covey was at the house, about one hundred yards from the treading-yard where we were fanning. On hearing the fan stop, he left immediately, and came to the spot where we were. He hastily inquired what the matter was. Bill answered that I was sick, and there was no one to bring wheat to the fan. I had by this time crawled away under the side of the post and rail-fence by which the yard was enclosed, hoping to find relief by getting out of the sun. He then asked where I was. He was told by one of the hands. He came to the spot, and, after looking at me awhile, asked me what was the matter. I told him as well as I could, for I scarce had strength to speak. He then gave me a savage kick in the side, and told me to get up. I tried to do so, but fell back in the attempt. He gave me another kick, and again told me to rise. I again tried, and succeeded in gaining my feet; but, stooping to get the tub with which I was feeding the fan, I again staggered and fell. While down in this situation, Mr. Covey took up the hickory slat with which Hughes had been striking off the half-bushel measure, and with it gave me a heavy blow upon the head, making a large wound, and the blood ran freely; and with this again told me to get up. I made no effort to comply, having now made up my mind to let him do his worst. In a short time after receiving this blow, my head grew better. Mr. Covey had now left me to my fate. At this moment I resolved, for the first time, to go to my master, enter a complaint, and ask his protection. In order to do this, I must that afternoon walk seven miles; and this, under the circumstances, was truly a severe undertaking. I was exceedingly feeble; made so as much by the kicks and blows which I received, as by the severe fit of sickness to which I had been subjected. I, however, watched my chance, while Covey was looking in an opposite direction, and started for St. Michael's. I succeeded in getting a considerable distance on my way to the woods, when Covey discovered me, and called after me to come back, threatening what he would do if I did not come. I disregarded both his calls and his threats, and made my way to the woods as fast as my feeble state would allow; and thinking I might be overhauled by him if I kept the road, I walked through the woods, keeping far enough from the road to avoid detection, and near enough to prevent losing my way. I had not gone far before my little strength again failed me. I could go no farther. I fell down, and lay for a considerable time. The blood was yet oozing from the wound on my head. For a time I thought I should bleed to death; and think now that I should have done so, but that the blood so matted my hair as to stop the wound. After lying there about three quarters of an hour, I nerved myself up again, and started on my way, through bogs and briers, barefooted and bareheaded, tearing my feet sometimes at nearly every step; and after a journey of about seven miles, occupying some five hours to perform it, I arrived at master's store. I then presented an appearance enough to affect any but a heart of iron. From the crown of my head to my feet, I was covered with blood. My hair was all clotted with dust and blood; my shirt was stiff with blood. I suppose I looked like a man who had escaped a den of wild beasts, and barely escaped them."

Yes, folks; THAT'S slavery. For Ian to use the term "slave" to describe himself (and his parents as well; wow, now THERE'S some unresolved hostility, huh?) is of course obscene nonsense, as any sentient comparison between the life he leads and that of an actual slave quickly reveals. But don't worry, he'll "make more", for the narcissist's delusions aren't constrained by reason.

FreeKeene, Inc.: "Where Words Have No Meaning"
http://soundclick.com/thinkliberty thinkliberty

Ann, What are you talking about? A name is just a name, if someone won't let you use the one you want and is in a position of power then it's not really your chosen name; Because you did not chose it.

ANAMAZEDREADER… "bringing hyperbole to a new level"
AnAmazedReader

Yes, a name is just a name. In fact, I've just decided I'm no longer Ann. I'm now Ulysees S. Grant, 18th President of the United States. But now I'm tired of that. My name is now Thinkliberty, because thinking I'm refuting a person's argument simply by repeating it back to them is extremely satisfying to my quite childish, undeveloped mind.

By the way, this was another classic:

THINKLIBERTY wrote:

"Because you did not chose it."

Simply fantastic. It's really hard to believe that so few people look to you for intellectual sustenance and guidance. Unrecognized genius, I guess.
http://soundclick.com/thinkliberty thinkliberty

Thanks Ann, I appreciate your kind words. It's a start, even if you don't mean it.
Zeus

Ann, when you are held in bondage, subservient to the will of another, you're a slave. That's the definition of the word. So long as the gang called government claims it can take our property, our freedom and our lives by force and without our consent and can pass arbitrary, illogical diktats for which disobedience can mean theft of your property, imprisonment in a cage or death by enforcer, we are all slaves.

Of course, slavery comes in different levels of oppression and violence. A fact which you conveniently ignore.

Tornadoes come in multiple levels of unpleasantness as well. The excerpt you've provided is an example of the "F5 Tornado"-equivalent of slavery. And while most of us these days are not subject to that kind of savagery yet, being an "F1 Slave" is certainly not any more acceptable just because its less unpleasant.

But please, don't let this logic stop you from making excuses for government continuing to grab more and more power and pass more and more draconian laws that it's members aren't subject to follow themselves.

Eventually, in the not too distant future, when most Americans are once again "F5 Slaves" toiling in the fields, you can shout out "Now THIS is slavery!" and bask in your cleverness for a moment before you hear the crack of the whip and feel its bite across your back. Oh how superior you'll be then compared to all these Free Keeners.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good [people] to do nothing." – Edmund Burke
Andrew

In the spirit of this activism, if you didn't want to go as far as changing your name, you could file a petition to add "none of the above" to the ballot.
http://freetalklive.com/ Ian

Wouldn't that require a change to the city charter?
Nosimplehiway

Okay, so far you've succeeded at: removing a libertarian voter from the rolls, preventing a libertarian candidate being nominated for office with only the incumbent as an opponent, and using up taxpayer-funded resources, in the form of office time and the attorney's billable hours. (Thereby slightly increasing the tax burden for the people of Keene.)

Congratulations in your recent success at what I can only guess is your, umm, fight against libertarianism?

Good job, Nobody!
Lpviper

Excuse me, snarky commenter, but the only one of those that is true is that Ian used the office time. The bureaucrats did all those other things. None of those people who are now 'taxpayer-funded resources' were forced to take those positions. They could have said 'no' to coercion and gotten private sector jobs, but they didn't do that. Who does the greater wrong, the man who applies to the mob to have his own tyranny reduced, or the tax feeders who reject and refute every such attempt?
Nosimplehiway

Snarky? Yep, but I still stand behind my post. If there's an election coming up in which the incumbent is running unopposed, enough with childish games of trying to get on the ballot with a funny nickname.

Get your voter registration re-instated with an actual address like most grown-ups, file for the nomination in your name, run for the position and if you win, change some policies.

As far as the use of taxpayer's resources, public officials and their attornies are required (by law) to follow and enforce the law to the best of their ability and judgment, not always an easy thing in an unusual case like this one. They were bound to spend time and money figuring out whether Ian's requests were legal. Is it my gut-check that the town should have allowed him to run as "Nobody"? Hell, yeah. But they had to look into it, and that means billable hours expended.

Like it or not, this prank (very slightly) increased the size of government in Keene, and is wasting an opportunity to actually change the system from within.
http://ringingliberty.com Paul

They should not be enforcing foolish and counterproductive laws.

The reality is, the law is so convoluted and ponderous that it can be used arbitrarily to stop any behavior of which they do not approve. Repeatedly, those who are well connected with government do things that are technically illegal — but no one worries about it, because no one wants to.

The reality is, the law is used as a tool by bereaucrats to stop people and behaviors of which they do not approve. Cops "cook something up" when someone does something they don't like — usually "disorderly conduct" or the like. If it's another bureaucrat breaking the law, however, their actions go ignored, or at most buried in an "internal investigation" which invariably never goes anywhere, or exhonerates even the most igregious behavior.
Nosimplehiway

Paul, you are absolutely right. In poker terms, I see your charge of corruption and Byzantine laws, and I raise you an opportunity to run for office and change those laws.

We need new people in office who will change how things are done. If Ian dutifully filled out their silly forms, ran for and won the office, he could work to pass a law allowing a conscience clause, so public employees could ignore any law they personally considered "foolish and counterproductive" in the course of their official duties.

I'm not sure how good of a reform that would be, but if that's what Ian's goal was, the best way to achieve it is to get elected to office. Not by making an admittedly entertaining video.
Zeus

Voluntaryist Translation:

Paul, you are absolutely right. In poker terms, I see your charge of corruption and Byzantine [diktats], and I raise you an opportunity to [join the gang] and [futilely attempt to] change those [diktats].

We need new people in [that gang] who will [futilely attempt to] change how things are done. If Ian dutifully filled out their silly forms, ran for and won [a high position of membership in that gang], he could [attempt to convince the other gang members] to pass a [diktat] allowing a conscience clause, so [lower-class members of the gang] could ignore any [diktat] they personally considered “foolish and counterproductive” in the course of their [standard level of coercion and initiated violence against non-members].

I’m not sure how good of a reform that would be, but if that’s what Ian’s goal was, the best way to achieve it is to [join the gang]. Not by making an admittedly entertaining video.

Attempting to join an organization of people whose goal is to wield a monopoly on legitimate force so that they can coerce non-members with the threat of violence into obeying whatever diktats they or their authorized bribers (AKA lobbyists) demand is a futile endeavor.

It relies on too many false assumptions: Primarily being that A) the induction competition for being selected as a member is a fair process, B) that by being a member and working from the inside you now have a reasonable chance of enacting substantial changes to render it harmless or controllable, C) you can somehow convince a majority of other members that doing what the organization exists to do in the first place is wrong, and D) that doing so with good intentions (or any other reason) is still compatible with the Non-Aggression Principle.

Ian's video demonstrates this futility. Not only did they not want him to compete for a position in their gang (as he might infect others with a desire for liberty or encourage others to seek it out and take over leadership of the gang), they wanted it so bad they decided to revoke his ability to even vote (AKA weigh in on which gang members should receive or retain an enhanced status).
http://ringingliberty.com Paul

<blockquote cite="Nosimplehiway">

Paul, you are absolutely right. In poker terms, I see your charge of corruption and Byzantine laws, and I raise you an opportunity to run for office and change those laws.

We need new people in office who will change how things are done. If Ian dutifully filled out their silly forms, ran for and won the office, he could work to pass a law allowing a conscience clause, so public employees could ignore any law they personally considered “foolish and counterproductive” in the course of their official duties.

I’m not sure how good of a reform that would be, but if that’s what Ian’s goal was, the best way to achieve it is to get elected to office. Not by making an admittedly entertaining video.

Hiway,

They already apply the law as they see fit. Those in government violate their own laws all the time. Police abuse power every day in this country. The fundamental problem is that we have people who have a monopoly on the initiation of force. No matter what set of laws you have, those in power will always be able to abuse that power. Take a look at the constitution — it supposedly strictly limited government, but is almost completely ignored today.

I support your approach of getting involved in government, and I also support efforts outside of government, like civil disobedience, but the ultimate goal must be the elimination of aggressive violence. Not only is it inherently immoral, but as long as we permit some to exercise such power over others, that power will always be abused. Not only does power corrupt, but the power hungry and corrupt are the most likely to seek power in the first place.

A human being simply does not have the right to use violence or the threat of it against another, to force them to live a certain way, or to extort money from them. The only moral use of force is defensive.
Zeus

I encourage everyone to consider not participating in their game of Keep-Away. Keep your dignity and just let them have the friggin' candy already.