[Lnc-business] Request for co-sponsors for motion to support campaign of Joe Buchman
Ken Moellman
lpky at mu-net.org
Tue Jul 11 22:32:34 EDT 2017
I cannot co-sponsor because I'm an alternate. However, I have had several
conversations and I want to chime back in and revise my statements from my
initial email.
I do not know Dr. Buchman personally, and nothing I said before was meant
to be personal. As a former campaign manager, anything that sounds like "I
can't win" makes me want to set the room on fire. I'm a bit sensitive on
that matter.
Since that time, I have learned more information.
The core issue is the use of the funds. If the funds are being used to
increase the ability of the campaign to do long-term outreach (supplies
promoting the LP, building local parties, etc.), I could be convinced to
support such a measure. By contrast, if the funds are being used to
purchase supplies like yard signs or other "temporary" campaign-related
costs, I'd definitely be against it.
I'm just an alternate, so my vote rarely counts. But after obtaining more
information and further thought on the matter, I felt it necessary to
append my previous comments with these.
ken
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 5:48 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Joe is also a friend of mine, and yes, he is "okay" with it, meaning no
> ill feelings as he is a long-term and dedicated member of the Party who
> understands that this is business, he certainly urged me to ask, and has
> been asking me for updates-- so it would mean a great to him and his
> campaign. This is the only Federal race going on right now - and he just
> scored a victory getting into a previously denied debate. I have explained
> the realities of the situation with having no set standards yet and he
> understands -- but he certainly did ask me to pursue this. And members
> have asked me about it.
>
> As to funding ballot access, though I respect my predecessor Norm
> immensely - he and I are of different minds when it comes to ballot access
> funding - he would routinely vote no. I have always voted yes. There are
> many reasons for that but one issue that arises is that Region 1 gets short
> shrift in that - or it can **appear** so. I am fully on board with the
> idea that nationwide ballot access benefits everyone, but it is certainly
> true that these funds do not go to Region 1 - with the highest numerical
> amounts of affiliates (9 states). Utah is Region 1 and helping with a
> Region 1 campaign helps to balance this out and thus far, I have had the
> full support of my regional chairs when supporting ballot access funding
> because I press the case that region 1 is getting benefits from pushing
> national memberships and in their national membership.
>
> I also urge other members to give a contribution. I will be doing so when
> I see how this month's finances go.
>
> I thank David and Whitney for co-sponsoring. *I ask for one more.*
>
> --Caryn Ann
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 12:13 PM, William Redpath <wredpath2 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Joe Buchman is a multi-decade friend of mine. I thank him very much for
>> running--he jumped in at the last minute when another candidate backed
>> out--and wish him the best in his Campaign. I have personally contributed
>> $201 to Joe Buchman's Campaign. I urge other members of the LNC to do so,
>> as well. However, I am opposed to the LNC contributing to his Campaign. I
>> have discussed this with Joe, and he is OK with no LNC funding of his
>> Campaign. I wish we did, but the LNC currently does not have the resources
>> to be contributing to many, if any, candidates, particularly when we have
>> other needs, including ballot access in Tennessee and Alabama. And, we
>> have Ohio to finish, and that is a big job.
>>
>> I ask people not to co-sponsor this motion and, should it become a
>> motion, to vote "No."
>>
>> Bill Redpath
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Tue, 7/11/17, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com
>> <https://mg.mail.yahoo.com/neo/b/compose?to=carynannharlos@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Request for co-sponsors for motion to support
>> campaign of Joe Buchman
>> To: "Libertarian National Committee list" <lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> <https://mg.mail.yahoo.com/neo/b/compose?to=lnc-business@hq.lp.org>>
>> Cc: "Joseph Buchman" <drbuchman at gmail.com
>> <https://mg.mail.yahoo.com/neo/b/compose?to=drbuchman@gmail.com>>
>> Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2017, 1:31 PM
>>
>> Joe got in
>> the debates - this is getting momentum. I am once again
>> asking for the needed co-sponsors.
>> -Caryn Ann
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:08 PM, David Demarest <dprattdemarest at gmail.com
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I will co-sponsor.
>>>
>>> On Jul 11, 2017 12:32 PM, "Caryn Ann Harlos" <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Joe got in the debates - this is getting momentum. I am once again
>>>> asking for the needed co-sponsors.
>>>>
>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:45 AM, Daniel Hayes <danielehayes at icloud.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Nick,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am sure you are already on it but would this warrant a letter from
>>>>> Oliver? It sounds like it may. Only including two people from the old
>>>>> establishment parties in the debate, for the sake of time as the criteria I
>>>>> have seen for the inclusion, doesn't seem unbiased to me. AFP is a
>>>>> non-profit as I recall. That might put AFP in an even more precarious
>>>>> position than the television station in Montana.
>>>>>
>>>>> As this is regarding potential legal action, I don't expect much of a
>>>>> response here on this public list. I am certain the letters,
>>>>> correspondence, filings and other actions, if appropriate, will be put into
>>>>> action by those with the letters J.D. behind their name.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel Hayes
>>>>> LNC At Large Member
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 11, 2017, at 1:31 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Dr. Buchman sent this to me this morning to provide an answer to Ken's
>>>>> inquiry and to give information and a request about the debates he has been
>>>>> excluded from. It did not make it to my inbox however and he re-sent to me
>>>>> after speaking on the phone this evening and since that time he has been
>>>>> officially denied debate access (as per the response I posted in another
>>>>> LNC business thread). But please take this information into consideration
>>>>> in this request.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know that we want to develop a candidate assistance procedure. And
>>>>> I understand that is on the agenda for August. But I ask please do not let
>>>>> that get in the way of assisting a candidate now. It is not the fault of
>>>>> the candidates that we don't yet have such a procedure and this is in the
>>>>> only Federal race now - great opportunity to get attention for a committed
>>>>> Libertarian candidate. Please consider this request..... and in member
>>>>> relations purpose, it does not help member confidence when we are not
>>>>> assisting when we can in a race that has the sole stage right now.
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>Why won't we assist with the campaign of this candidate in the
>>>>> Federal race?
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>Because we don't have criteria for assistance.
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>Why don't you have criteria?
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>Because we haven't done it yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> >>>So candidates suffer from LNC lack of establishment of protocol?
>>>>>
>>>>> The Mark Wicks donation invigorated that race and our members. This
>>>>> could do likewise. Please co-sponsor my request.
>>>>>
>>>>> The below is from Dr. Buchman:
>>>>>
>>>>> ===========
>>>>>
>>>>> I am asking for help from those who have connections with Americans
>>>>> for Prosperity in my request to be included in their Third District
>>>>> candidate debates. Please see the email I sent to them copied below and
>>>>> help if you can.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I said in the KSL interview, the first step toward winning is
>>>>> getting into these debates. I see getting into the debates as where the
>>>>> focus should be, just as a mountain climber focuses on the next step, or
>>>>> Governor Johnson focuses on the next curve in his mountain road. To focus
>>>>> on "winning the race" rather than those immediate intermediate goals is not
>>>>> a winning strategy; it's delusional. I did not say, and have never
>>>>> said, "I am not going to win." What I said was: "I am not running
>>>>> to win . . . primarily I am running, first, to get into the debates." I
>>>>> also said: "The chances of a Libertarian winning the Third District
>>>>> in Utah are not impossible; I’m swinging; I’m going to go for it; I’m
>>>>> giving it everything I have. "
>>>>>
>>>>> I sure wish saying that had made every KSL and LNC listener "happy."
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll leave it to others to discern if my interview with Doug Wright
>>>>> (has invited me back again) is fairly characterized as a "concession
>>>>> speech."
>>>>>
>>>>> If that has left you off-put for listening to the entire interview,
>>>>> I'd ask you read the following for the full context and reconsider:
>>>>>
>>>>> WRIGHT: This gentleman has some KSL connections that we’ll talk about
>>>>> some other time, but I want to really get into the motivation, what caused
>>>>> you to want to get into this race; you’ve got a PhD, you’re running as a
>>>>> Libertarian, so let’s just set the stage. Give us a little background on
>>>>> you and why you are in this race.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BUCHMAN: You know Doug, when I walked into your waiting room, I see
>>>>> there in the lobby, huge letters on the wall, “A Light of Truth in the
>>>>> World.” The truth that I run on is the foundation of Libertarian politics
>>>>> which is the fundamental principle in our philosophy that drives our
>>>>> politics, our ethics, our morality and those other fields of philosophy of
>>>>> which politics is one, is pretty simple, that is that no human being should
>>>>> have the right to initiate force, violence against others, to initiate
>>>>> force. And then the second core principle is that you either own your
>>>>> physical body, it’s yours to do with as you see fit, or you’re part slave;
>>>>> you’re owned by someone else. So we take the principles of non-initiation
>>>>> of aggression and self-ownership and we apply them to politics.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Like you said, I am a college professor, that’s where I am coming
>>>>> from. I am not running to win, the chances of a Libertarian winning the
>>>>> Third District in Utah are not impossible; I’m swinging; I’m going to go
>>>>> for it; I’m giving it everything I have . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> WRIGHT: right . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BUCHMAN: . . . if I can get Rosie O’ Donnell to retweet something, who
>>>>> knows . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> WRIGHT: It worked for Dr. Allen.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BUCHMAN: . . . or Drew Carey, or Penn & Teller or some other
>>>>> Libertarians who we are reaching out to, who knows? Anything is possible;
>>>>> but primarily I am running, first of all, to get into the debates. We need
>>>>> a Libertarian voice in the debates.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> My email to Americans for Prosperity:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Joseph Buchman <drbuchman at gmail.com>
>>>>> Date: Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 3:45 PM
>>>>> Subject: Third District Candidate debate
>>>>> To: infout at afphq.org
>>>>>
>>>>> I am writing as the Libertarian Party of Utah's candidate for the
>>>>> Third District to request inclusion in the debates sponsored by Americans
>>>>> For Prosperity.
>>>>>
>>>>> See, for example, https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154532862
>>>>> 572120&set=gm.1744266952269118&type=3&theater
>>>>>
>>>>> I am on the ballot as a General Election candidate for this office,
>>>>> see:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://elections.utah.gov/election-resources/2017-candidate-filings
>>>>>
>>>>> In the absence of an invitation to participate in your debates, may I
>>>>> inquire of the standards/process for your selection of candidates?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your attention to this request,
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> These debates were announced on Friday; the first debate is to be
>>>>> held tomorrow (Tuesday evening). I'll be there either in the
>>>>> audience or on the stage. See:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.sltrib.com/news/5485360-155/two-debates-set-for-t
>>>>> hree-republican
>>>>>
>>>>> And while they are now being repurposed as for the "Republican primary
>>>>> candidates only" please note the portion of the article which indicates the
>>>>> Democrat was invited.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Democrat Kathie Allen — who's raised nearly $700,000 in donations —
>>>>> did not respond to an invitation to join the event, Everton said."
>>>>>
>>>>> Evelyn Everton is the Utah State Director for Americans for
>>>>> Prosperity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Again any help you can offer would be greatly appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope you'll listen to the entire KSL interview and form your own
>>>>> opinion of it. I'm sure I could have done better and continue to seek your
>>>>> constructive feedback as well as help in having Americans for Prosperity
>>>>> include the Libertarian in their debates.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks again for your consideration,
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe
>>>>> _______________________
>>>>> Joseph G. Buchman, PhD
>>>>> 584 Hillside Circle
>>>>> Alpine UT 84004
>>>>> +++++++++++
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------Caryn Ann
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Very good points Starchild and both views are represented in our
>>>>>> membership.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I certainly hope we don't divisively "take sides" on that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 6:07 AM Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ken,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're certainly not the first Libertarian to express a disappointed
>>>>>>> emotional reaction to a candidate's realistic appraisal of his or her
>>>>>>> chances, but to you and any other Libertarian who has felt this way, I say
>>>>>>> take heart! One can lose in conventional terms and still win in libertarian
>>>>>>> terms. A *conventional* win means the warm body you
>>>>>>> support occupying the sought-after office. A *libertarian* win,
>>>>>>> however, means advancing the cause of freedom! Such wins can happen in any
>>>>>>> number of ways – building momentum for a future run, exposing more people
>>>>>>> to libertarian ideas, building the party, etc. Of course the cause of
>>>>>>> freedom is *usually* more likely to be advanced by a Libertarian
>>>>>>> occupying the sought-after office than by not occupying it – but it isn't
>>>>>>> the be-all, end-all it's too often made out to be. In some ways, the real
>>>>>>> fight begins *after* an election is won. If an elected Libertarian
>>>>>>> isn't mentally prepared to stick to his or her libertarian principles and
>>>>>>> positions, or doesn't have solidly libertarian principles or positions to
>>>>>>> begin with, the real, post-election fight for what s/he will do in office
>>>>>>> is as good as lost. Amid the statist culture and pressures in which s/he
>>>>>>> will be immersed, such an elected Libertarian will have little chance of
>>>>>>> surviving with an agenda to advance the cause of freedom intact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Predicting* an election loss also isn't the same thing as
>>>>>>> *conceding*. When a candidate *concedes* a race, s/he is saying
>>>>>>> "the campaign is over, my opponent won". Clearly Joe Buchman is saying no
>>>>>>> such thing! From appearances, he is running and will continue to run a
>>>>>>> vigorous campaign and seek as much exposure for our ideas and as many votes
>>>>>>> as possible. He is running to win in libertarian terms. But is it wise to
>>>>>>> predict a loss at the ballot box? While miracles occasionally do happen
>>>>>>> and I've suggested candidates leave the perceptions door open by not
>>>>>>> entirely ruling out the possibility of getting elected, I would much rather
>>>>>>> see a Libertarian fighting a long-shot campaign – and this is obviously a
>>>>>>> long-shot campaign; no Libertarian has come close to being elected to
>>>>>>> Congress – say flat-out that s/he won't win, than to flat-out say that s/he
>>>>>>> will. Any candidate facing those kind of odds who predicts electoral
>>>>>>> victory is either deceiving him/herself, or attempting to deceive others.
>>>>>>> The former shows a poor grasp of reality, while the latter shows a lack of
>>>>>>> integrity. Neither reflects well on the candidate! Joe, by contrast, showed
>>>>>>> his good character by giving an honest and realistic assessment of his
>>>>>>> chances. For every person out there who thinks, 'I want to vote for someone
>>>>>>> who tells me s/he's going to win', I believe there's another person out
>>>>>>> there thinking, 'I want to vote for someone who has integrity and tells the
>>>>>>> truth'. To which type of voter mentality should we, as the Party of
>>>>>>> Principle, be trying to appeal?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Love & Liberty,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ((( starchild )))
>>>>>>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>>>>>> RealReform at earthlink.net
>>>>>>> (415) 625-FREE
>>>>>>> @StarchildSF
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Jul 10, 2017, at 12:00 AM, Ken Moellman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found out about this campaign yesterday (now, 2 days ago) and the
>>>>>>> referenced KSL interview almost immediately starts with the candidate
>>>>>>> saying "I'm not going to win." It made me sad. More importantly, I can't
>>>>>>> agree to give money to someone who has already conceded the race. I mean,
>>>>>>> what is the money going to be used for? Losing better?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By contrast, from what I can see, candidates like Laura Ebke and at
>>>>>>> least one of the recent converts in NH are gearing up re-election campaigns
>>>>>>> with the intent to win. They certainly haven't publicly conceded, anyway.
>>>>>>> There are lots of candidates throughout the country gearing up for 2018
>>>>>>> races. 4 L converts and many other candidates looking to run winnable
>>>>>>> races.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If this body decides to support candidates, I'd really rather see
>>>>>>> this body support candidates that are running to win.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 2:18 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>>>>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello everyone, I received the below request from Dr. Joe Buchman
>>>>>>>> (Utah) and have been speaking with him about this for the past few weeks.
>>>>>>>> I would like us to consider assisting him to our maximum allowed of 5K.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ========
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To the members of the LNC:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The resignation of Representative Chaffetz nine days ago from the
>>>>>>>> Third District of Utah has created a Special Election to be held 7
>>>>>>>> November 2017.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joe Buchman is the Libertarian Candidate for that seat and
>>>>>>>> following a special election convention by the Libertarian Party of Utah is
>>>>>>>> on the ballot for November 7th. There is a Democratic opponent.
>>>>>>>> Three Republicans will face each other in a primary next month.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See: https://elections.utah.gov/election-resources/2017-cand
>>>>>>>> idate-filings
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is, we believe, the only remaining contest for federal office
>>>>>>>> in 2017 with a Libertarian candidate.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To date Dr. Buchman has invested $1,000.00 of his personal funds in
>>>>>>>> the campaign and has raised approximately $250.00 from other donors, with
>>>>>>>> promises for about $500 in process.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joe has just been scheduled as the sole guest for the first hour of
>>>>>>>> Coast to Coast AM, a national networked late-night radio talk show with an
>>>>>>>> estimated *2.5 million listeners*, for *Saturday evening, July
>>>>>>>> 29th, 10:05PM to 11:00PM Pacific time*. Past show hosts Art Bell
>>>>>>>> and Rollye James were self-identified Libertarians, and past guests have
>>>>>>>> included Judge Jim Gray, Michael Badnarik, Aaron Russo, Harry Browne, Andre
>>>>>>>> Marrou and Dr. Buchman himself (in 2008, when he last ran for the US
>>>>>>>> Congress).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> See: http://www.coasttocoastam.com/search/?query=libertarian
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joe will be discussing his campaign for the US Congress, his
>>>>>>>> platform as an expression of the NAP and Self-Ownership paradigms, will be
>>>>>>>> directing listeners to his website and will be requesting donations. The
>>>>>>>> Coast to Coast website will also provide a link to his campaign site -
>>>>>>>> www.GotoL.vote
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a request for national party funding for this singularly
>>>>>>>> important Special Election campaign.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The resignation of Representative Chaffetz has already generated
>>>>>>>> significant national media attention, and this race is likely to continue
>>>>>>>> to generate national media coverage as the replacement of Congressman
>>>>>>>> Chaffetz will reflect, to some degree, a measure of voter confidence in the
>>>>>>>> Trump administration.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Libertarian Party nationally will benefit from this election,
>>>>>>>> the last of 2017 to include a Libertarian candidate for federal office.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If a funding agreement can be reached prior to the show, Dr.
>>>>>>>> Buchman would then appeal to Coast to Coast listeners with a promise that
>>>>>>>> any donations received during the show will be matched dollar-for-dollar.
>>>>>>>> The show will be replayed and will also be available as a download from the
>>>>>>>> network website.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joe has been interviewed by three local papers (the Salt Lake
>>>>>>>> Tribune, Deseret News and City Weekly) and by KSL Radio's Doug Wright.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That 9 minute radio interview can be found at:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.ksl.com/?nid=1388&a=11898
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bottom line: Joe is experienced with media interviews, had a prior
>>>>>>>> career in radio (including working with Bill Redpath at WTTS radio in the
>>>>>>>> 1970s), is passionate about both Libertarian political pragmatism and
>>>>>>>> philosophy, *and is currently scheduled for one of the most
>>>>>>>> visible media appearances by any Libertarian Candidate this month* (and
>>>>>>>> perhaps for the remainder of this year).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This special election creates something of a special case for
>>>>>>>> funding; an amount equivalent to that provided to the recent candidate in
>>>>>>>> Montana would seem equitable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> With gratitude for your consideration of this request,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joe
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> PS If you do choose to listen to the KSL interview and/or to review
>>>>>>>> the website and links to the print interviews there; ALL feedback,
>>>>>>>> suggestions for improvement are also welcomed.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> *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/>
>>>>>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>>>>> *We defend your rights*
>>>>>>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>>>>>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>>>>>> Lnc-business at 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *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>
>>>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>>> *We defend your rights*
>>>>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>>>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> *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>
>>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>>
>>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>>> *We defend your rights*
>>>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>>> Lnc-business at 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
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *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>
>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>
>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>> *We defend your rights*
>>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *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>
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>
> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
> *We defend your rights*
> *And oppose the use of force*
> *Taxation is theft*
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170711/b5d47af2/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list