“Mr. Lingenfelter would have added a lot to the debates,” said Otter, a Democrat.

Mike will add all that is needed to the debate regarding the Constitution-based concerns that Conservatives cherish. Democrat-Otter can now return to helping Democrat-Murphy, free of the responsibility to defend fraudulent petition signatures.

Tom can now concentrate on his race for State Representative.

Problem is, we NEED more conservatives in office right now just to get us back toward the middle. I think Mike was much to moderate in his voting when in office, which will not get us to where we need to be. I also don’t see him as a big believer in limited government. Hopefully, next run in 2012, we can get some TRUE conservatives on the ballot. Especially if we can get some in the state GOP.

[...] Ligenfelter saga continues. Perennial candidate Tom Ligenfelter won’t be running for congress this year. After a tedious eight hour coutroom drama that involved going over signatures one by one [...]

FitzFlop – what a piece of crap. Two pathetic choices in PA-08.

Bucks Voter 3:

Whaaaah!

We need to eliminate the two party system in this country. It is simply outdated in the 21st century with a much more diverse population base. Only two parties does not do justice to the depth of THE PEOPLE. Time to end the non consistent signature requirements to run for office in Pa. just because one chooses not to run as a Democrat and Republican. Why should the requirements be different for those two and not other established parties? Makes no sense NOT to make the requirements equal. No sense at all. And, please, don’t give me this baloney that the largest are more established. That has zero to do with how the population is more diverse in the 21st century. Unless, that is, those in power in the two established parties are running scared that there just may be someone else out there that’s a better candidate than what they have to offer. If that’s the case, even more reason to make the requirements to run EQUAL.

Love Lingenfelter or not, he steps up.
The so called hearing was a farce. The judge was not arbitrating but prosecuting. The witnesses against Lingenfelter never showed up. Why? Were they told in advance to ignore a subpeona? The court actually ruled to support an unconstitional PA law. A show trial. Everyone should be offended by the process because it’s tyranny in action.

There is no greater entitlement in society than the Democratic and Republican Parties feeling entitled to their seats in government. We need a third party – especially here in PA where the Republicans are not much better than the Democrats.

If the Founding Fathers were here today in PA, they would not support either of the corrupt national parties in PA and would start a new party. It won’t be easy and won’t happen overnight, but we really need to end the 2-party system in the US.

Agree with everyone about needing change with the two party system. However, Tom Lingenfelter is not the best choice to be the first person to represent the 3rd party in CD-8. He is a Constitutional man, but he just doesn’t have what it takes to win over voters. Hopefully someone will come around in 2012.

RTY —

I get very suspicious when someone says “If the Founders were alive today, they’d do what I think!”

Tom is the best candidate for the job and it is a shame he didn’t win the R nomination instead of being forced to run as an independent. To some Tom comes off as an angry old man but to those of us that want real change we see Tom as honest and upfront which is so lacking in DC. Tom would have given them a run for their money in DC. Unfortunately we will have to bite the bullet with Fitz and then sit on him to ensure he tows the conservative line. He won’t sit for two terms if he does not tow the true conservative platform.

DEAR DR. SKARLOFF
IF I WERE YOU I WOULD NOT THROW AROUND FRAUD CHARGES LIKE PAPER CLIPS
STICK TO WHATEVER EVER YOU DO AND STOP SHOWING YOUR IGNORANCE

To: “Bucks Barrister”
Re: “Fraud Charges”

I believe that, when chatting with Tom on Monday-p.m. [during his 10 p.m. call], I inserted a “conditional” when suggesting to him that it was possible that Commonwealth Court Judge Dan Pelligrini might have threatened “sanctions” due to documented-defects in the submitted petitions (which Tom admitted he hadn’t vetted prior to having submitted).

I also asserted that he will have “a long way back” from having voluntarily withdrawn (while having legal counsel); just as he cannot reasonably say he was “pressured” not to run as an independent (by whom? under what circumstances?), he will not be able (absent the ability to quote a smoking-gun attack from the transcript) to claim the judge was somehow biased during last week’s proceedings.

I told Tom that it will be difficult (after he skips the step of an en-banc CC-appeal) to convince the PA-Supremes that one of their colleagues had somehow gamed the system in an outright conspiratorial fashion; approaching the Federal Bench with any such “civil rights” violation claim would predictably be met with comparable skepticism.

I have some experience during the past two decades with the innards of political campaigns, so how these comments reflect “ignorance” is patently unclear and (as is often the state when ad-hominem comments are generated) unstated; yet, because I believe I still nurture an open-mind, I would invite substantive-statements regarding what I might have missed.

Again, I emphasize my opening comment to Tom, when he complained I had based my writings on inaccurate press-reports; he has a great reputation as a Constitutional scholar that he should direct towards his independent campaign for State Representative (the petition-signatures for which were NOT challenged by the incumbent).

[*-Metaphorically, I would recall the capacity of time-wasters to create chains of paper-clips...rather than merely "throwing them around"...and I would advise Tom to ponder whether continuing to pursue his personalized flailing-approach to electoral politics will only tend to undermine the credibility of his rhetorical rule-of-law stump-speech.]

The Judge in Tom’s case Threw the US Conbstitution in the Trash Can by trying to overrule a Federal Judges decision on Circulators. This Commonwealth Senior Judge Must be Punished by being overruled First of all It is Illegal and a Violation of the PA Constitution to have a Judge serve after 70 Years Old Plus a Judge Must be elected Senior Judges are Illegal but the State Supreme Court lets them get away with it . If we need more Juges Create New seats and let people run for them But stop with these Judges with Altzheimers This is in My Opinion

Tom is a Great Candidate

Leave it up to the lawyers. They always win.