[Lnc-business] Latest Libertarian Bruhaha
Starchild
sfdreamer at earthlink.net
Sun Jan 14 19:52:16 EST 2018
What I'm wondering is, why was Arvin even asked that question? How is his response to such a hypothetical even relevant to his or anyone else's social media outreach? What purpose did it serve, other than to try to create a "Gotcha!" moment that could be used politically? If anything, the fact of someone asking him this bothers me more than his response does. If he'd said "None of your business", would you have considered that an acceptable response Michelle?
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
RealReform at earthlink.net
(415) 625-FREE
On Jan 14, 2018, at 9:32 AM, Michelle MacCutcheon wrote:
> David,
>
> It's not about not scaring voters, volunteers, etc. though there will be extra fallout from this.
>
> It's about him personally saying "probably not" with regards to sex with a 14 year old as an adult of what 30? This is reprehensible.
>
> That is fact and I fail to see how you don't see that.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michelle MacCutcheon
> michellemaccutcheon at gmail.com
> 513.292.6380
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 11:36 AM, David Demarest <dprattdemarest at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Michelle,
>
> You again make it explicit that this hubbub is really about avoiding scaring voters to get elected, but at the expense of being honest about principles, the real point that Arvin has made. We are both concerned about losing leaders. You are concerned about losing voters. I am concerned about losing our moral compass and becoming amoral jackasses just like the Republican and Democratic parties that we are supposed to be fighting against.
>
> A political party that is strictly focused on getting people elected is a party without a moral compass and a danger to all of us and our way of life and just a another clone of the two disgusting major parties.
>
> If the LP continues on the path exemplified by this motion, you may gain some undesirable politicos, but lose the type of moral leaders that created the Libertarian Party in the first place, without which we would not be having this conversation and those suffering from pandemic electivitis would have little chance to pursue opportunistic politically-motivated electoral adventurism.
>
> Michelle, thank you for speaking up. Now, back it up with rational but compassionate due diligence.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> On Jan 14, 2018 9:52 AM, "Michelle MacCutcheon" <michellemaccutcheon at gmail.com> wrote:
> David,
>
> I stayed mostly silent on all the provocateur stuff from Arvin Vohra despite the fact that I was literally the only one in my whole state in Field Development leadership at the time (Membership coordinator with no Director or Deputy of Field Development or Volunteer coordinator) despite me loosing many new recruits that were going into leadership (veterans).
>
> Arvin Vohra stated that he would "probably not" when questioned if he personally would have sex with a 14 year old. This is not okay in any manner and is harming recruiting efforts when we are nearing completion on our ballot access drive in Ohio. This is quite literally going to harm our candidates and recruiting efforts for membership that he seems to condone hebophelia(sp?). It is having a direct and negative effect on what do every day for the party.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michelle MacCutcheon
> michellemaccutcheon at gmail.com
> 513.292.6380
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 6:59 PM, David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
> Caryn Ann, that is to your credit. Even if we disagree on this issue, I admire your honesty. Many of the contributors to this discussion could learn from your determination to stick to your principles after careful rational analysis. That will be the saving grace of the Libertarian movement.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt
>
>
>
> May 25-27 2018 Omaha Roads to Freedom UnConvention - https://OmahaUnConvention.com/
>
>
>
> Freedom, Nothing More, Nothing Less, For All People
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> Roads to Freedom Foundation, Founder - https://R2FF.org/
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI)
>
> LSLA Vice-Chair
>
> LPNE State Central Committee, Secretary
>
> LPRC Board Member, Nebraska State Coordinator
>
> David.Demarest at LP.org
>
> Secretary at LPNE.org
>
> DPDemarest at centurylink.net
>
> DPrattDemarest at gmail.com
>
> David.Demarest at OmahaUnConvention.com
>
> Cell: 402-981-6469
>
> Home: 402-493-0873
>
>
>
> From: Caryn Ann Harlos [mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org]
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 5:48 PM
>
>
> To: David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
> Cc: Aaron Starr <aaron.starr at lp.org>; Alicia Mattson <alicia.mattson at lp.org>; Arvin Vohra <arvin.vohra at lp.org>; Daniel Hayes <daniel.hayes at lp.org>; David Demarest <dprattdemarest at gmail.com>; Dustin Nanna <dustin.nanna at lp.org>; Ed Marsh <ed.marsh at lp.org>; Elizabeth Van Horn <elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org>; Erin Adams <erin.adams at lp.org>; George Syroney <georgeliberty67 at gmail.com>; Harold Thomas <harold.thomas at lpo.org>; James Lark <james.lark at lp.org>; Jeffrey Hewitt <jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org>; Joshua Katz <joshua.katz at lp.org>; Larry Sharpe <larry.sharpe at lp.org>; Michelle MacCutcheon <michellemaccutcheon at gmail.com>; Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org>; Patrick McKnight <patrick.mcknight at lp.org>; Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein at lp.org>; Sean OToole <sean.otoole at lp.org>; Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>; Steven Nekhaila <steven.nekhaila at lp.org>; Steven Nielson <steven.nielson at lp.org>; Tim Hagan <tim.hagan at lp.org>; Trent Somes <trent.somes at lp.org>; Whitney Bilyeu <whitney.bilyeu at lp.org>; William Redpath <william.redpath at lp.org>
> Subject: Re: Latest Libertarian Bruhaha
>
>
>
> That we will.
>
>
>
> To parallel your thoughts, I don’t allow the fact that there are vitriolic opportunistic critics to give me an out to the fact that there is legitimate concern.
>
>
>
> Frankly Arvin has taken cover under that too many times and I may be slow too see it and give benefit of the doubt but once seen it cannot be unseen.
>
>
>
> My conscience is to vote yes at this time. However my promise to my Region was to represent them unless it violated my principles. I would not vote no at this time but rather abstain if my region didn’t want a yes. I could change my mind.
>
>
>
> But nothing - certainly not Arvin’s behavior- is persuading me.
>
>
>
> And this is costing me. Some have decided I am a faux radical and anarchist.
>
>
>
> When I campaigned I said my views cross factional lines. That results in everyone being irked at something but I sleep like a baby.
>
>
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 4:32 PM David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>
> Caryn Ann,
>
>
>
> We will have to agree to disagree about the objective value of Arvin’s comments. That is not surprising and healthy among principled Libertarians. Contrary to some that are operating on hearsay, I have read and carefully analyzed much of Arvin’s comments. He has courageously identified several government-imposed moral dilemmas that many Libertarians are not handling appropriately because we would starve if we dealt with them in one fell swoop. Arvin has done the hard work of rational analysis and expressed himself passionately on his rational conclusions. The are many more important government-imposed moral dilemmas that have not been addressed yet that we Libertarians need to face up to even if we must play with the cards dealt to us today and make personal adjustments incrementally.
>
>
>
> Most of the irrational garbage messages I have seen so far by most contributors to this discussion represent passionate expressions with little or no rational basis and, even more concerning, the blatant refusal to base their arguments on a sound rational footing. To be blunt, I would tell those irrational lynch-mob ‘activists’ to get off their intellectual backsides and do the hard rational-analysis work that Arvin has done. Then we will be in a better position to have serious discussions and get on with the Libertarian movement agenda. The current vitriolic level of irrational discussion is unacceptable and poorly represents Libertarian values and principles. Give outsiders the credit they deserve. They may not agree with some of our rational principles because they do not understand them yet. However, they can smell political-correctness misrepresentations of conscience a mile away and will not be impressed.
>
>
>
> I will listen carefully to any serious and thoughtful input from Region 6 Libertarian activists and beyond. The bulk of the shrill responses I have seen so far are disappointing but there have been some less-noticed exceptions. However, I will always, always vote my conscience regardless of any risk of political capital. I will never cave in to the temptation to conserve political capital at the expense my conscience. I could care less about reaping political capital rewards and have accordingly self-term-limited myself to one term as Region 6 Representative to make room for fresh voices that will hopefully always vote the dictates of their conscience.
>
>
>
> I have zero respect for those who do not vote their conscience and the same goes for those who favor filling the tank with gas and putting the pedal to the metal with no thought to a moral-compass steering wheel. That will get them somewhere in a hurry but is it really where they want to go? I thought that a moral-compass ‘steering wheel’ was what we Libertarians were fighting for. Lynch-mob Libertarians need to look themselves in the eye and do some serious soul-searching on how they are going to differentiate themselves from the duopoly opposition that has no moral compass.
>
>
>
> Hopefully, we are ready to stop wallowing in this disgusting bandwagon political-correctness quicksand and move on to more appropriate Libertarian initiatives, including addressing some of the legitimate issues that Arvin has raised.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt
>
>
>
> May 25-27 2018 Omaha Roads to Freedom UnConvention - https://OmahaUnConvention.com/
>
>
>
> Freedom, Nothing More, Nothing Less, For All People
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> Roads to Freedom Foundation, Founder - https://R2FF.org/
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI)
>
> LSLA Vice-Chair
>
> LPNE State Central Committee, Secretary
>
> LPRC Board Member, Nebraska State Coordinator
>
> David.Demarest at LP.org
>
> Secretary at LPNE.org
>
> DPDemarest at centurylink.net
>
> DPrattDemarest at gmail.com
>
> David.Demarest at OmahaUnConvention.com
>
> Cell: 402-981-6469
>
> Home: 402-493-0873
>
>
>
> From: Caryn Ann Harlos [mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org]
>
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 4:25 PM
> To: David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
> Cc: Aaron Starr <aaron.starr at lp.org>; Alicia Mattson <alicia.mattson at lp.org>; Arvin Vohra <arvin.vohra at lp.org>; Daniel Hayes <daniel.hayes at lp.org>; David Demarest <dprattdemarest at gmail.com>; Dustin Nanna <dustin.nanna at lp.org>; Ed Marsh <ed.marsh at lp.org>; Elizabeth Van Horn <elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org>; Erin Adams <erin.adams at lp.org>; George Syroney <georgeliberty67 at gmail.com>; Harold Thomas <harold.thomas at lpo.org>; James Lark <james.lark at lp.org>; Jeffrey Hewitt <jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org>; Joshua Katz <joshua.katz at lp.org>; Larry Sharpe <larry.sharpe at lp.org>; Michelle MacCutcheon <michellemaccutcheon at gmail.com>; Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org>; Patrick McKnight <patrick.mcknight at lp.org>; Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein at lp.org>; Sean OToole <sean.otoole at lp.org>; Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>; Steven Nekhaila <steven.nekhaila at lp.org>; Steven Nielson <steven.nielson at lp.org>; Tim Hagan <tim.hagan at lp.org>; Trent Somes <trent.somes at lp.org>; Whitney Bilyeu <whitney.bilyeu at lp.org>; William Redpath <william.redpath at lp.org>
>
>
> Subject: Re: Latest Libertarian Bruhaha
>
>
>
> David I agree that there are completely panicked responses that are irrational or just unlibertarian - that the state is Mommy and Daddy ... but not everyone’s are. And those who are not ARE RIGHT.
>
>
>
> Arvin is wrong here and is incredibly destructive and doesn’t get to shield himself with “muh Principles” / I share them with just as much anarchist bona fides as he, and his lack of wisdom, discretion, and messaging are utterly inappropriate for a leader of the nation’s third largest political party.
>
>
>
> I’m not making “radical” friends with this. It will cost me.
>
>
>
> I don’t care. I wasn’t elected to protect myself or my friends but this Party.
>
>
>
> I was one of the long-suffering before. I have forbearance and patience. I’m done. And the completely disrespectful and patronizing email last night by him to this list was the final evidence.
>
>
>
> My opinion is clear. He should resign. However my *vote* depends on my region.
>
>
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 3:03 PM David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Caryn Ann,
>
>
>
> Thank you for your response and inclusion of rationality in this discussion. Now we are getting somewhere, but there is much work left to do. My underlying point is that if we Libertarians intend to present a rational face both internally and to the broader audience, it is high time to put the rational ‘horse’ before the passionate emotional response ‘cart’. Reason without heart and heart without reason is a false dichotomy. The real question is which comes first. I am a passionate Libertarian but only after doing up-front rational due-diligence analysis. Our primary means of survival is our rational capacity. I never cease to be amazed at Libertarians who dismiss our rational capacity and resort to the vitriolic nonsense that we have witnessed in this latest ideological fiasco.
>
>
>
> You will notice that Arvin’s ‘inflammatory’ comments are all about rational analysis and his passionate responses AFTER arriving at his rational conclusions. I can understand that some disagree with some of his rational analysis. However, when their responses and calls to lynch mob action are conspicuously if not entirely devoid of anything remotely related to rational analysis, pardon me, but I am totally unimpressed and disappointed. Caryn Ann, you have done a better job, but several issues bear further rational examination.
>
>
>
> If reasoned logical and rational conclusion make the job harder to get elected to top-down authoritarian positions, that raises a huge red flag and the question of what comes first. If getting elected takes precedence over accurate representation of the dictates of one’s conscience, we obviously have a fundamental ethical dilemma, exacerbated, of course, by our current cronyism-riddled non-competitive form of governance. I find the notion of determining the dictates of one’s conscience by taking a popular poll both morally offensive and ethically indefensible. I am totally unsympathetic to the evil notion of making one’s dictates of conscience subservient to get elected to top-down authoritarian positions in our cronyism-riddled and corrupt electoral system.
>
>
>
> Per our earlier discussion, I can see the similarity between possession of black-market child pornography and the possession of black-market stolen goods. However, the bigger concern from my perspective is how we handle our disapproval, i.e., whether by oppressive, arbitrary and corrupt government enforcement, lynch mob justice or the far more powerful and effective long-term means of thoughtful economic and social ostracism or reinforcement feedback as appropriate.
>
>
>
> We have seen many vitriolic, hysterical and lynch-mob responses to the current bruhaha just as we did on the earlier hubbubs last year about Satan-gate and putting the military and public-school teachers on inappropriate pedestals. I hate to say this, but we Libertarians have a long way to go. Are we capable of fixing the underlying problems? Yes! Do the current brute-force responses to this ruckus have us headed in the right direction. No!
>
>
>
> It might surprise some, but fortunately there have been some rational responses to Arvin’s rational approach to these important government-imposed moral-dilemma questions. You must look hard to find them under the current vitriolic mindless smoke screen, but they are there. Just as the principled Libertarian ideas that led to the creation of the Libertarian Party, reflected in our Statement of Principles, were scorned by most back in 1971, now is the time for the next step to re-rationalize our current Libertarian ideological principle base beyond mere crass emotionalism and thoughtless lynch-mob mentality.
>
>
>
> I would point out again that these bruhahas appear to be primarily and directly related to electoral concerns. I would submit that those false-dichotomy electoral concerns will get relegated to insignificance when entrepreneurs build private replacements for government overreach social services. If you have a choice of who you buy social services from free of government social service monopoly interference, that choice will set the stage and inspire the election of Libertarians to all levels of government, starting from the bottom up, to provide for the necessary regulatory relief.
>
>
>
> Enough of this mindless rationality-rejecting lynch-mob vitriolic fiasco. Let’s get on with using our heads for what they were designed for, namely passionate responses AFTER thoughtful due-diligence analysis, not before.
>
>
>
> Caryn Ann, your injection of the fresh air of rationality into this bruhaha is a step in the right direction. Keep up the good work!
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt
>
>
>
> May 25-27 2018 Omaha Roads to Freedom UnConvention - https://OmahaUnConvention.com/
>
>
>
> Freedom, Nothing More, Nothing Less, For All People
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> Roads to Freedom Foundation, Founder - https://R2FF.org/
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI)
>
> LSLA Vice-Chair
>
> LPNE State Central Committee, Secretary
>
> LPRC Board Member, Nebraska State Coordinator
>
> David.Demarest at LP.org
>
> Secretary at LPNE.org
>
> DPDemarest at centurylink.net
>
> DPrattDemarest at gmail.com
>
> David.Demarest at OmahaUnConvention.com
>
> Cell: 402-981-6469
>
> Home: 402-493-0873
>
>
>
> From: Caryn Ann Harlos [mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org]
> Sent: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:52 PM
> To: David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
> Cc: Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>; Michelle MacCutcheon <michellemaccutcheon at gmail.com>; George Syroney <georgeliberty67 at gmail.com>; Harold Thomas <harold.thomas at lpo.org>; Erin Adams <erin.adams at lp.org>; Whitney Bilyeu <whitney.bilyeu at lp.org>; Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein at lp.org>; Tim Hagan <tim.hagan at lp.org>; Daniel Hayes <daniel.hayes at lp.org>; Jeffrey Hewitt <jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org>; Joshua Katz <joshua.katz at lp.org>; James Lark <james.lark at lp.org>; Ed Marsh <ed.marsh at lp.org>; Alicia Mattson <alicia.mattson at lp.org>; Patrick McKnight <patrick.mcknight at lp.org>; Dustin Nanna <dustin.nanna at lp.org>; Steven Nekhaila <steven.nekhaila at lp.org>; Steven Nielson <steven.nielson at lp.org>; Sean OToole <sean.otoole at lp.org>; William Redpath <william.redpath at lp.org>; Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org>; Larry Sharpe <larry.sharpe at lp.org>; Trent Somes <trent.somes at lp.org>; Aaron Starr <aaron.starr at lp.org>; Elizabeth Van Horn <elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org>; Arvin Vohra <arvin.vohra at lp.org>; David Demarest <dprattdemarest at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Latest Libertarian Bruhaha
>
>
>
> Hi David, I can assure you I am not betraying the dictates of my reason. Reason without heart is inhuman. Heart without reason is base animalism.
>
>
>
> Do I believe in freedom of speech and expression? Do I think the overwrought reactions to nudity are downright nonsensical? Does that mean I must think James Weeks was a courageous voice? No. Because it was foolish, counterproductive, and violated others.
>
>
>
> Just because someone might have something "Libertarian" they are saying in there somewhere (i.e. arbitrary age of consent laws are collectivist - note that doesn't mean they can't generally get it right - generalizations can be true because they have some truth or no one would buy them) doesn't mean they are a courageous hero.
>
>
>
> In fact, rather than being a beacon of light, Arvin is actively harming the presentation of core libertarian values by providing a plentiful target for which the principle can be scapegoated. His awful presentation of issues surrounding the military, education, welfare, etc have given the opponents of libertarian principles, both within and without, a way to smear to the principles with the messenger. We may not like that such can be easily done. But if wishes were fishes we would all cast nets. As for me, I don't live on wishes and unicorns.
>
>
>
> Arvin is affecting me personally. He is making my life, my job, and my presentation of liberty harder. That is not heroic. That is an obstacle.
>
>
>
> I have sent out an inquiry to the Regional Chairs today to see their thoughts.
>
>
>
> Personally, this is my position. I think Arvin should resign. This has gotten ridiculous. Alternatively, the delegates can make their choice in July. But a lot of damage is done between then and now. To put his peers and associates in the position of having to vote to censure or remove is an incredibly selfish and belligerent move.
>
>
>
> The "response" last night to the LNC list was a perfect example of the tone-deaf tactic. A member responded that it seemed to them like gaslighting. And as someone who has been involved in very manipulative relationships, they hit the nail on the head.
>
>
>
> Enough is enough.
>
>
>
> And what he is doing is going to lead precisely to what he is saying he is "saving us from" (newsflash, we didn't elect a messiah)- worse candidates that do not stick to principles because we have modeled them in the worst possible way and made the liberating beauty of freedom repulsive.
>
>
>
> Do you want the party to take a hard turn towards unprincipled "centrism"? This is how you get it.
>
>
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 13, 2018 at 9:36 AM, David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net> wrote:
>
> Damn. I was looking forward to a visit tomorrow to a neighboring state LP business meeting to publicize the rapidly approaching NOLA National Convention and Omaha Roads to Freedom UnConvention. Halleluiah, now I can use the possible snowy roads as an excuse to avoid the inevitable fallout from the latest Libertarian ruckus that will likely dominate the business meeting. However, that would be the coward’s way out. Furthermore, I had a dream just before waking up this morning that has changed my perspective.
>
>
>
> First a little background behind the dream I am about to narrate. I belong to the Alternative Book Club (ABC), which is a spinoff from Toastmasters focused on collaborative non-fiction books, most notably their ‘Spotlight on the Art of …’ series. My first published article was the ‘Big Picture Significance’ chapter in their latest release, ‘Spotlight on the Art of Significance’. I recently had to take a hiatus from Toastmasters and the book club until after I leave First Data on March 2nd, launch my writing career, get the Roads to Freedom Foundation off the ground, and get through the exciting crush of 2018 Libertarian events, including several state conventions, LSLA national conference, Omaha Roads to Freedom UnConvention, Porc Fest, NOLA National LP Convention, and Freedom Fest. Whew!
>
>
>
> Today, however, I am happy to report that my dream this morning, clearly prompted by the latest Libertarian hubbub, has changed my outlook on this controversy and my inclination to stay at home tomorrow. I do not mysticise the value of dreams. Nevertheless, they likely appear to be a reaction to internal conflicts complicated by random associations that often provoke new perspectives and happily generate seeds for future writing projects. Even though many of my ideas are a bit controversial for the Alternative Book Club, my dream this morning revolved around the book club analysis, assimilation and development of possible solutions to the latest Libertarian bruhaha and incorporation of them into a new collaborative book titled ‘Spotlight on the Art of Solving Libertarian Bruhahas’. J
>
>
>
> As best I can recall, my dream focused on the passionate but logical, objective and courageous voice of reason rising above the wilderness of pile-on band-wagon political-correctness, over-dramatized reactions and subjective emotion-based shrill howl of the mob. Dreams, of course, are typically exaggerations of reality. What particularly struck me in my dream were the mob mutterings of “I don’t trust others (voters and other Libertarians) to take care of their own feelings” and “I don’t trust myself to take responsibility for my own feelings”. Two other things stood out in my dream. One was the almost universal preponderance of mob concerns that reflected their fear of scaring off voters and losing votes in their drive to gain elected authority over others that prompted them to misrepresent the dictates of their conscience in a desperate search for votes. The other was the incessant blaming of a controversial figure as a misrepresentation of their own self-doubts.
>
>
>
> I am sure my random dream associations stemmed in part from the valuable conflict resolution, stress management and negotiation training under the banner of assertive behavior counseling that was a turning point in my life and helped me through a ‘mid-life crisis’. Just as important, my earlier assertiveness training taught me that sitting around blaming controversial figures for my personal intellectual discomforts was particularly unconstructive behavior and did little to resolve either my personal internal conflicts or the controversy whose source I was using as a scapegoat for my personal shortcomings and self-esteem/self-image issues.
>
>
>
> You know, I feel better already knowing that my dream unjustly characterized many Libertarians. Armed with that realization, I am prepared to risk the snowy roads to Kansas City tomorrow and enjoy the company of rational Libertarians as we celebrate Libertarian victories and prepare for tremendous progress in 2018.
>
>
>
> I am sure the mob will have fun with my dream. Nevertheless, I hope it serves to help point this controversy in a different and more rational direction.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt
>
>
>
> May 25-27 2018 Omaha Roads to Freedom UnConvention - https://OmahaUnConvention.com/
>
>
>
> Freedom, Nothing More, Nothing Less, For All People
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> Roads to Freedom Foundation, Founder - https://R2FF.org/
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI)
>
> LSLA Vice-Chair
>
> LPNE State Central Committee, Secretary
>
> LPRC Board Member, Nebraska State Coordinator
>
> David.Demarest at LP.org
>
> Secretary at LPNE.org
>
> DPDemarest at centurylink.net
>
> DPrattDemarest at gmail.com
>
> David.Demarest at OmahaUnConvention.com
>
> Cell: 402-981-6469
>
> Home: 402-493-0873
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20180114/f265c053/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list