[Lnc-business] Cuban Prisoner Resolution - Take 2- request for co-sponsors

Tue Feb 28 16:08:39 EST 2017

How about "dismantle the evil empire"?

Oops - let my emotions get carried away with the moment. 😃

On Feb 28, 2017 2:06 PM, "Whitney Bilyeu" <whitneycb76 at gmail.com> wrote:

> HELL, YES!
>
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> <I can't help myself>
>>
>> My favour action verb of that type is ABOLISH!!!!
>>
>> Okay I said.
>>
>> I feel better.
>>
>> - Caryn Ann
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I agree with the shock and concern as part of a press release, public
>>> statement, immediate reaction, informal comment, etc...and I don't think
>>> such a response should be downplayed at all.
>>>
>>> However, as a standing formal resolution, I just prefer something less
>>> dramatic.
>>>
>>> And....I totally agree with your very last statement...a great deal of
>>> what I want to say about many things is NSFW!!!
>>>
>>> It is true that we (LP) could do better at having/showing feelings ;).
>>>
>>> However, I, personally, find emotionally charged statements off-putting
>>> as an initial engagement piece.
>>>
>>> I guess I hope that an even-tempered, objective statement opens the door
>>> to the more emotional discussions that need to occur...
>>>
>>> 'Strongly opposed to...' has more meaning/bite than 'angry about...' or
>>> 'abhor...' (examples) to a left-brainer, like myself, at least :/.
>>>
>>> I prefer to use:
>>> oppose
>>> resist
>>> reject
>>> etc...
>>> (imply action is to be taken, or would be taken)
>>>
>>> I will probably reject the use of:
>>> am angry about
>>> am shocked by
>>> am saddened over
>>> etc...
>>> (mere feelings without action, passive-aggressive implications)
>>>
>>> I will consider:
>>> regret
>>> etc...
>>>
>>> For the record, I don't wholly reject emotion or emotional language when
>>> it comes to making political statements...and I concede that there are gray
>>> areas.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Part of our problem in Party image is that we don't use strong emotion
>>>> enough.  Emotion is human and connects to people.  Our lack of it leads to
>>>> the perjorative cartoon of Libertarians as having political autism.
>>>>
>>>> When people are seized and thrown into a Cuban gulag - particularly our
>>>> ideological brethren - in violation of basic principles - shock and concern
>>>> is a mild form of what I would say.
>>>>
>>>> What I personally would say would be NSFW.
>>>>
>>>> --Caryn Ann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:04 AM Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> 'Shock' and 'concern' are not words I want to use - subjective,
>>>> emotional...
>>>>
>>>> When I vote on a resolution, I cannot merely consider the spirit of the
>>>> message.  I consider the depth of the language, the meaning behind each
>>>> word, possible interpretations, pitfalls, and potential fallout.  I never
>>>> want to publish something that winds up being a waste of words or that
>>>> requires retraction.
>>>>
>>>> I also have to consider whether or not the statement sounds like
>>>> something I would say, or something I could justify ever saying...I admit I
>>>> struggle to adopt the words of others as my own....which is basically what
>>>> we are being asked to do when we vote on resolutions.
>>>>
>>>> Whitney Bilyeu
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr at yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think the fourth sentence has an extra "that" that doesn't belong.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tim Hagan
>>>> Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad <https://yho.com/footer0>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, February 27, 2017, 9:53 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The agreed to change is as follows:
>>>>
>>>> I took Joshua's new resolution to the author of the Nevada resolution
>>>> for input.  He suggested some changes and agreed that the last paragraph
>>>> should not be a part (in his non-LNC opinion).  IF this passes, specific
>>>> direction we can give to the staff can be part of a separate motion (and
>>>> one that does not require 3/4 btw).
>>>>
>>>> I would like to offer this as a new resolution and ask for co-sponsors:
>>>>
>>>> *The Libertarian National Committee expresses shock and concern for the
>>>> detention of libertarian activists Ubaldo Herrera Hernandez and Manuel
>>>> Velasquez by agents of the Castro regime in Cuba on February 2, whose
>>>> unexplained detention raises suspicions that these political prisoners were
>>>> targeted for their peaceful activism promoting limited government and free
>>>> markets. **The two men are believed to be political prisoners
>>>> imprisoned in the infamous Melena II facility, known for appalling living
>>>> and working conditions. * *We further ask for an inquiry and response
>>>> from** the Castro regime for information related to their detention,
>>>> an accurate and complete register of charges, and and for assurances that
>>>> they will receive fair and open trials on any legitimate charges.  We
>>>> further ask that the Cuban government for their immediate release should
>>>> such information and assurances not be forthcoming. We encourage
>>>> Libertarian Party members and supporters to contact their elected officials
>>>> toward that end, and further ask that the International Alliance of
>>>> Libertarian Parties join us in applying diplomatic pressure for the Castro
>>>> regime to release information related to their detention and call upon the
>>>> national and international media to join us in these efforts.*
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 10:52 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Starchild or anyone else, will you co-sponsor this amended resolution?
>>>>
>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 6:20 PM, David Demarest <
>>>> dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Tim. I have no objection to the change you suggested.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ~David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Dec 10-13 2017 <10-13%202017> Omaha Libertarian Strategy Un-Convention*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Celebrate Life, Set the Bar High and LIVE FREE*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>>>>
>>>> LNC Region 6 Representative
>>>>
>>>> Secretary, LPNE State Central Committee
>>>>
>>>> Cell:      402-981-6469
>>>>
>>>> Home: 402-493-0873
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at h q.lp.org
>>>> <lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org>] *On Behalf Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>>
>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 26, 2017 5:45 PM
>>>> *To:* Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr at yahoo.com>; Libertarian National
>>>> Committee list <lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Cuban Prisoner Resolution - Take 2-
>>>> request for co-sponsors
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have no objection - Joshua and David???
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tim will you co-sponsor with that change?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr at yahoo.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Because e-mail ballots have no provision for amendment, I ask the
>>>> sponsors to modify the resolution before it goes to a vote by spelling out
>>>> instead of using the acronym IALP, so readers won't think the LNC is making
>>>> a request to the International Association of Logopedics and Phoniatrics.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tim Hagan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, February 26, 2017 10:34 AM
>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Cuban Prisoner Resolution - Take 2-
>>>> request for co-sponsors
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I voted no because it made, in my view, unfounded accusations against a
>>>> foreign government, and because it contained no action other than 'calling
>>>> up' and 'demanding.'  I suspect others may have voted no for the same
>>>> reasons I did.  This alternative, in my mind, addresses the first concern,
>>>> and at least contains some hints about the second.  I can't say I'm
>>>> terribly enthusiastic, but since email ballots have no provision for
>>>> amendment, I don't think it's unreasonable for a second motion to try to
>>>> address concerns of those who voted no on the first.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 12:23 PM, Sam Goldstein <
>>>> goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Did the first motion fail?  Why are we wasting more time on this.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Feb 26, 2017 1:19 PM, "Joshua Katz" <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I will cosponsor.  I fail, however, to understand the following clause:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *We further ask for an inquiry and response from the Castro regime for
>>>> information related to their detention,*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are we asking the Cuban government, which is holding the people, to
>>>> look into it?  Wouldn't they, presumably, already know the answer?  It's
>>>> fully possible that I'm missing something, though.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I took Joshua's new resolution to the author of the Nevada resolution
>>>> for input.  He suggested some changes and agreed that the last paragraph
>>>> should not be a part (in his non-LNC opinion).  IF this passes, specific
>>>> direction we can give to the staff can be part of a separate motion (and
>>>> one that does not require 3/4 btw).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would like to offer this as a new resolution and ask for co-sponsors:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *The Libertarian National Committee expresses shock and concern for the
>>>> detention of libertarian activists Ubaldo Herrera Hernandez and Manuel
>>>> Velasquez by agents of the Castro regime in Cuba on February 2, whose
>>>> unexplained detention raises suspicions that these political prisoners were
>>>> targeted for their peaceful activism promoting limited government and free
>>>> markets. The two men are believed to be political prisoners imprisoned in
>>>> the infamous Melena II facility, known for appalling living and working
>>>> conditions. * *We further ask for an inquiry and response from the
>>>> Castro regime for information related to their detention, an accurate and
>>>> complete register of charges, and and for assurances that they will receive
>>>> fair and open trials on any legitimate charges.  We further ask that the
>>>> Cuban government for their immediate release should such information and
>>>> assurances not be forthcoming. We encourage Libertarian Party members and
>>>> supporters to contact their elected officials toward that end, and further
>>>> ask that the IALP join us in applying diplomatic pressure for the Castro
>>>> regime to release information related to their detention and call upon the
>>>> national and international media to join us in these efforts.*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *In Liberty,*
>>>>
>>>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>>>>
>>>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>>>> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
>>>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
>>>>
>>>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
>>>> <http://www.lpcolorado.org/>
>>>>
>>>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
>>>> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>> <http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>> <http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/ listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp. org
>>>> <http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>> <http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ______________________________ _________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>> <http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
> ...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170228/d9c802c7/attachment-0002.html>