Skip to main content

We all have guilty pleasures, from a Real Housewives binge-a-thon or ending the day with some ice cream and dismemberment. Mine happens to be messing with trolls online. For those unfamiliar with the term, Trolls are people who say and do things on online comment boards to get others unjustifiably pissed.

    They say things to screw with me, I say things that are pithy and sharp with just enough fact to make it stick, there's hopefully a laugh and then we all get stoned. It's a game – a messed up one, but harmless none the less. But, in real life, trolls are a little harder to come by, unless that is you see anyone with the LaRouche PAC. They are proof that not even the Internet has the ability contain all of the insanity of humanity, with it too frequently spilling out into the real world.

Stepping out of the air-conditioned Charles/MGH station into a hot and sticky Wednesday morning I found myself staring at a hand—scrawled announcement, “HILLARY REVEALS OBAMA LIED” tacked onto a stand covered in various campaign stickers and slogans. To those lucky enough to only be passing the booth it would have seemed like an overly prepared political group setting up for a day of canvassing.

    For the unfortunate souls who stopped to check it out, or were finally pestered enough to stop walking, the truth was much more depressing.

    Stepping up to the booth and seeing the amounts of cheaply self—printed asinine literature overflowing with too many pictures of eagles to be rational, I can almost feel the insanity approaching. At the same time, I am too drawn in to a potential new political fix to turn away.

     Within moments of stopping, an unnamed campaign worker, sun—glazed and slightly sweaty looking like a coked—out Florida Republican dressed in a blue polo, pastel shorts, boat shoes and the requisite douche—aviators.

    “Are you with us in impeaching the president?” He says a little too loudly with a nasal-wine. He then launches into an old screed in new wrapping paper. The Benghazi (yes, the Steve Prefontaine of pointless issues) theory he spins involves a new book recently released by a former Hillary Clinton friend reportedly detailing Clinton's initial reluctance to go along with the “official line” but was forced into line by Obama.

    After mentally dismissing this weak conspiracy theory (we caught the mastermind – what more do they want?) I start asking questions about the other planks in their platform. On the surface, they could be mistaken as reasonable; they want Glass-Steagall reinstated, Wall Street Bankrupted (totally ruined). Then he starts saying that they are looking to bring America back in line with the founders intent.

    Now, I should have read the signs and figured hey wouldn't be too happy to respond to questions, but I make the mistake anyway, “What do you mean by that?”

    Every political group invokes the founders – at this point, I would be much more inclined to listen to someone who started their speech with, “Fuck the Founding Fathers, here's our plan.” I might not agree, but I do respond to novelty than ill—defined placations.

    This is when I become personally acquainted with the debate style the LaRouchies are known for: he loudly declared that I was too stupid to understand what he was saying. Personally, I don't consider myself a genius or anything of the sort; I'm a Political Science major at a well respected Boston—Area School and have been on the deans list every semester.  

    Continuing his barrage through my repeated requests to educate me, he continued to call me dumb and refused to move on from the point. Over his yelling insults, I thanked him for his time, returned his paper and moved on. For most this would be the end of the story. Most aren't political junkies that just had a fix removed from right underneath their nose.

    After a quick Internet search, I begin to understand just how close was to one of Americas most notorious “political cults.” Starting off as a far—left organization fueled by Trotsky inspired rage, Lyndon LaRouche began a movement that transcends the normal definitions of the spectrum in their never—ending pursuit of his delirious ramblings.  

    Officially the group claims to be “Democratic/Liberal,” yet most of the main stream support they have received has been from far—right activists. This is mostly due to the fact that anytime a LaRouche “Democrat” runs for office, the winner tends to be a Republican thanks to the insane talking points they waste no time in spouting.

    Whatever type of national authority they once (may have) had evaporated in 1989 when Lyndon LaRouche and several of his subordinates were convicted on various counts of fraud. Though he was sentenced to 15 years, he was back out in the public eye in 1994.

    Two years after being released from prison, he made another attempted run for the Democratic party's nomination for President. Though he posed no real risk of taking the nomination away from then—president Clinton, he was specifically excluded by the Chairman of the DNC at the time, Donald L. Fowler.

    After LaRouche qualified for several primaries, Fowler issued a letter to all state party chairs stating in part, “Lyndon Larouche [sic] is not a bona fide Democrat...this determination is based on Mr. Larouche's expressed political beliefs, including [those] which are explicitly racist and anti-Semitic...and on his past activities including [the] exploitation of and defrauding contributers and voters.”

    It wouldn't be the last time he ran for president, but it would be the last time anyone could be confused about his “legitimate” status as a candidate.

    Since then, he has continued to grow his organization and spread wild conspiracy theories, such as: Being one of the first groups to spin a 9/11 truth story, the theory of climate change (not the actual event, only the theory) is a ruse by the Environmentalists to institute a “population reduction agenda,” according to one of their recently supported candidates, Kesha Rogers from Texas. Another, the US has a weather—controlling device that could end the drought in the Southwest, but isn't because of...I can't tell.

    FEC filings show that so far in 2014 the group has raised and spent more than 4.2 million dollars, while only officially donating five-thousand to the failed Rogers campaign. So, the most apparent question turns out to be: Where did the rest of the 99.94% of their cash go?

    By the time I finished my basic research, there were certainly more questions than answers. After pushing myself through the wet heat back to their stand, I was disappointed to find they had packed up and left (or kicked out). Undeterred, I called their office to get some better information.

    As with many political organizations, they have a dedicated press line. The conversation I have with their spokesperson (I can't be sure – they aren't much into identifying themselves) confirms to me personally they are more of a cult than anything.

    “Hello, are you with us in impeaching the President?” Is apparently the standard greeting for the group because this is the answer line for their press number. I ignore the bate and introduce myself – she has me spell my name twice. The Woman sounds like she would be a loving grandmother, kind but stern. She returns my greeting and is about to ask my feelings on impeachment before I stop to get her name, “Susan Director.” Not fishy at all.

    She has some technical difficulties and asks me if she can call me right back, “I have your number here,” she reads the digits back to me, then disconnects. After spending an hour reading about the groups history of going after journalists, this is the only time I'm happy being a non—professional.

    Calling me back from a Virginia number, Director confirms the money has been spent on outreach. “We invest a lot of our money in our outreach efforts,” Director says, rather curtly because I seem less than interested in their plans to impeach the President.

    She insists that what they do is more than simple canvassing, “We are the only [PAC] doing what we do...Engaging the public and trying to open their eyes to the truth.”

    Any organization that spends more than $4 million  in less than a year on outreach would be bound to attract some type of media attention; the biggest blow to their credibility (or the largest confirmation of a media 'conspiracy'), a Google News search primarily returns links to their own publication, The Executive Intelligence Review, and not much else.

    Her tone make the words sound less like political talking points and more like dogma. “The main stream media is brainwashing the American Public and we are trying to stop them.” When I ask her for any specific instances of brainwashing, things get weird.

    “I'm suspicious of you,” she says abruptly. “I can see that you're trying to be objective – We can't be covered objectively.” The dogma returns. “The objective reporting [is turning American] citizens to spectators at their own funeral.”

    The grandmotherly act quickly disappears and her inner troll comes out, “you are refusing to answer my questions about impeaching the President so I cannot tell if you are with us or against us.” She then decided to give me some writing tips, “if you want a good story, you need to talk about a grass-roots organization taking on a sitting US President and instead focusing on number crunching.”

    Trying to keep her on the phone I try and get some information about the “weather machine” that LaRouche demands be turned on. “You can find all of that information on the website,” she dismisses me than hangs up.

    The problem with this group isn't that they are crazy, or that they choose to hold the ramblings of a felon as close to their souls as dogma. I completely understand that we all are someone else's moron, no matter who you are. What needs to be publicized about this group is the probable fact they are stealing money from those who donate to them.

    According to their spokesperson Susan, the members of the LaRouche PAC are committed to saving civilization and have a quality of passion that others cannot hope to attain. So be warned, if your travels bring you to a group that seems professional but feels crazy – you could very well be dealing with trolls in people's clothes.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I just burst out laughing at the LaRouche (9+ / 0-)

    ding bats and they get very upset-very thin skinned people, who take their madness very seriously.  Try it, laugh right in their faces and then just walk away.  Good God we sure do have some political strange ones around Boston.  I think their version of reality is pumped up on paranoia, so you see laughing is the best antidote for the LaRouche boom-booms.  They can not take not being taken seriously because they are so full of their inflated selves.

    •  They came (three of them) to my wee little (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Uncle Moji, JeffW, NancyWH, Mopshell

      post office a while back and parked themselves and their propaganda table on the sidewalk. They didn't get a very good response here, but I did see some of the DFstaners having a convo with them.

      I hope they weren't stupid enough to give them money.

      The only hawk I like is the kind that has feathers. My birding blogs: http://thisskysings.wordpress.com/ and canyonbirds.net

      by cany on Sat Jun 28, 2014 at 09:21:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  A megalomaniac fraudster (6+ / 0-)

    The have a terrible record of defrauding the elderly, their convictions best I recall were for credit card and mail fraud. I first checked them out in the early 1980's when they 'Build the beam weapon' all over the airports and post offices. .  At one point he got enough money to buy a prime-time(!) 30-minute slot for a Presidential campaign speech, where in he said that 'no doubt within 6 weeks the Soviets will attack Germany'. Oh-huh. lolwut?

    Maybe next time, ask them how they expect to get money by insulting people.

  •  I case you haven't heard, Texas democrats dodged a (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Uncle Moji, JeffW, Catte Nappe, myboo, Mopshell

    a serious bullet during the runoffs when David Alameel ran against LaRouche supporter Keisha Rodgers. Alameel did win the democratic nomination for Senator. And I hope he can beat John Cornyn.

    But mark my words, I'm sure Miss Rodgers will turn up again to run for another office, spouting anti Obama rhetoric and other such drivel with the hopes that it'll get her elected.

    You know, this is an amazing country where we Badass Big ---- Democrats can allow the free speech of the little ---- Republicans who want to censor ours!

    by BlackWolf on Sat Jun 28, 2014 at 10:56:49 AM PDT

  •  They used to be all over Logan Airport in the 80s. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Uncle Moji, JeffW, elmo

    At least, I remember that from my annual trips to Boston back then.

    We had one fairly flaky assistant who ended up giving them money to "help fight the war on drugs" (I think that was their main pitch back then, before they had the "impeach Obama" fundraising tool), and she could not shake them for a year -- they were continually hounding her for money, sending her their silly newspaper, calling her for this or that rally. I would have felt sorry for her if she wasn't such a poor worker.

    But, anyway, if you Google it, you'll see they made quite a splash in Illinois in the early 80s, ending up on the ballot for 2 or 3 major state offices as Democrats. Basically, it was because the downstate Dems voted for them because they had "American names" like "Fairchild" instead of "Chicago names" like "Pucinski." After the primaries, the legit Dem candidates went independent and everybody lost big to a Repub who was pretty vulnerable because he raised taxes, I think.

  •  "We can't be covered objectively!" tells you a lot (8+ / 0-)

    You have to BELIEVE, like Fox Mulder! Otherwise youre an apostate and probably gay to boot!

  •  Konspiracy Kooks (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NancyWH, Tinfoil Hat, myboo, Mopshell

    I swear every city has them, every small town and village, too.  A slice of the population gets sucked into repeating this dribble because it makes them feel superior to us sheeple who just don't get it.

    It reminds of back in the day when "est" was at the height of its popularity during the human potential movements of the 1970s.  When you asked people who had been through est what it was all about, they would cryptically answer "It's about it.  And if you have to ask what it is, you don't get it."  

    Thanks for the enjoyable diary, and I applaud your curiosity and willingness to waste your time with these nutbags.

    "Out of Many, One Nation." This is the great promise of these United States of America -9.75 -6.87

    by Uncle Moji on Sat Jun 28, 2014 at 11:36:15 AM PDT

  •  Lyndon started out as a (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NancyWH, Mopshell

    fascist right winger, sending his thugs with 2x4's to beat up Vietnam war protestors.

    The guy probably has some connection to Propaganda Dua and the Red Brigades in Italy. He also spends considerable money on intell, they were possibly the first to expose the campaign against the Clinton's by Richard Mellon Sciafe.

    BTW, cult is a tag.

    .................expect us......................... FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

    by Roger Fox on Sat Jun 28, 2014 at 11:36:19 AM PDT

  •  They camp out in front of MIT (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mopshell

    2 or 3 times a year.  Glassy eyed freaks, usually in their twenties, holding up Godwin signs of Obama with a Hitler moustache.

    They don't seem to get a lot of attention from MIT folks.  I feel a strange mixture of pity and disgust for them.

    1. Books are for use.

    by looty on Sat Jun 28, 2014 at 03:27:49 PM PDT

  •  I suspect -- quite logically -- that if by some... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mopshell

    I suspect -- quite logically -- that if by some incredibly weird circumstance some high level LaRouche-bag does manage to get elected, that person will end up targeted for impeachment and/or removal from office.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site