[Lnc-business] FYI
Caryn Ann Harlos
caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Thu Jan 18 16:55:23 EST 2018
Wow. Exhibit B.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 2:03 PM Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. Is there a bylaws demanding empathy? Nope.
> 2. Is there some objective reason to believe that political
> effectiveness requires empathy? Nope.
> 3. Has empathy held our movement back, in that it leads people to
> refuse to speak out against things like government school use, and
> focus on things that are nice, like issues no one on earth, including
> most libertarians, know about or care about? Yes.
> Here's some perspective: If we succeed in our stated platform goals, we
> will be putting millions of government employees out of work. Sure, the
> total number of jobs may increase, but those specific people will be
> unemployed. They may face major life changes. Note that we'll also be
> getting rid of welfare and government employment insurance. People
> accustomed to upper middle class life will face major changes, often
> downgrades.
> Strength of will, willingness to accept the suffering of those who
> collaborated with the state, is what is required to see that through.
> Want to see the results of empathy? Take a look at our last
> presidential candidate's response to a mother's incompetence, and her
> son's bad decisionmaking. We need less empathy, not more, for this
> movement to do what it needs to.
> Respectfully,
> Arvin Vohra
> Vice Chair
> Libertarian National Committee
>
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
> <[1]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>
> Correct.
> There is an utter refusal to realize this isn’t about a perfect
> philosophical point.
> It is about basic judgment. A shred of empathy and
> consideration.
> Your continued behavior is convincing people.
> Enough already.
> And Daniel is right. You will just ratchet up.
> I don’t consent.
>
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:28 AM <[1][2]erin.adams at lp.org> wrote:
> I agree with Mr. Hayes on this. I have been relatively silent
> throughout
> this "ordeal" all the while sitting in consideration of all
> "sides".
> At
> this point,enough is enough.
> On 2018-01-18 11:20, Daniel Hayes wrote:
> > Arvin,
> >
> > I have been a staunch “NO” on your removal. It was not
> because
> I
> > think
> > there should be no government involvement in age of consent
> because
> > I
> > do think there needs to be some line in the sand on that
> issue. My
> > strong reluctance has been because it potentially chills the
> speech
> > of
> > this board’s members which should be somewhat bold advocating
> for
> > Liberty. It’s never a good outcome when members of a board
> vote to
> > remove their peers. We don’t want our governance of the
> > organization
> > between conventions to be a circular firing squad. We also
> don’t
> > want
> > to encourage overall members to know that if they exaggerate
> and
> > mischaracterize what someone they don’t agree with says and
> then
> > jump
> > up and down enough, they can have them removed. Then there is
> the
> > fact
> > that I personally like you.
> >
> > All of that said, you just don’t recognize that we are a
> POLITICAL
> > PARTY. This is not about finding the exact right
> philosophical
> > argument. We are also dealing with people’s emotions here.
> You
> > are
> > still arguing the academic point. This is not about that.
> It’s
> > ultimately about your lack of empathy to others on this
> board,
> > others
> > running for office, and others in the Party and others that
> have
> > been
> > victims of child sexual abuse. You say families and culture
> should
> > stop it. The sad reality is it is usually a family member
> that is
> > the
> > abuser or a trusted friend of the family or a trusted
> cultural
> > member
> > of their community like a church leader. That is why we need
> SOME
> > law
> > that makes a line in the sand. Then we need to be more
> diligent as
> > a
> > society and make greater use of jury nullification when the
> law
> is
> > abused as well as hold legislators to task. That said this
> is
> a
> > sensitive issue and you just don’t show any sensitivity.
> >
> > It is your latest attempt to sway minds on the LNC that has
> swayed
> > mine
> > with this sentence.
> >
> > “But as I consider the actions of the aforementioned great
> minds, I
> > believe that I have been, perhaps, too timid.”
> >
> > This says to me that over the next 5 month you are only going
> to
> > ratchet up your rhetoric. It is with great sadness that I
> must
> > consider myself as a “YES” on any vote for your removal.
> >
> > Daniel Hayes LNC At Large Member
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> > On Jan 18, 2018, at 10:26 AM, Arvin Vohra
>
> <[1][2][3]votevohra at gmail.com>
>
> > wrote:
> >
> > A bit more information for consideration before the
> upcoming
> > electronic
> > meeting. This is taken from my facebook page:
> > Over the last few days, I've heard from many people about
> > different
> > Libertarian theories of age of consent, both online and
> offline. I
> > have
> > become convinced that a law that I previously considered
> sort
> of
> > silly
> > is far more deeply flawed than I realized.
> > The issue with current laws is that it tries to set the age
> of
> > consent
> > as "the age past which sexual manipulation is impossible,
> or
> > extremely
> > unlikely." This is a fools errand. There is no such age.
> > Biologically, the prefrontal cortex continues developing
> until
> > around
> > age 25. However, the prefrontal cortex of some 25 year olds
> will
> > obviously be inferior to that of other 16 year olds.
> > But the physical development of the prefrontal cortex
> doesn't
> tell
> > the
> > whole story. 40 year olds, because of their life
> experience,
> may
> > have
> > more impulse control than 25 year olds, as well as more
> ability to
> > manipulate. Some people are, through genetics or practice,
> easily
> > able
> > to manipulate people their own age or older.
> > And some people don't. Even the hardcore statists haven't
> gone so
> > far
> > as to argue that 100% of sex between teenagers and adults
> is
> > problematic, that at no point in history was that
> beneficial.
> Some
> > have
> > even discussed the lasting marriages of their own
> grandparents
> > (and
> > occasionally parents).
> > Many supposed anarchists have gone running to statism, like
> the
> > "brave"
> > kids who run and hide behind mommy at the first sign of,
> well,
> > anything.
> > There are other models worth considering. The first is the
> German
> > model. Yes, I know it's still statism, but it can inform
> anarchist
> > and
> > minarchist thought. In Germany, the age of consent is set
> low, at
> > 14.
> > However, if there is an age gap, and the younger person
> feels
> as
> > if
> > he
> > or she has been exploited, manipulated, etc., that person
> can
> > press
> > charges. This enables positive romance, and puts a bar on
> > manipulation.
> > It puts the burden of responsibility on the older person,
> which is
> > where it should be. American law, on the other hand,
> basically say
> > to
> > a
> > younger person who feels exploited, but was of age, "Well
> you
> said
> > yes,
> > sucks to be you LOL!!!"
> > Murray Rothbard discussed "homesteading", which has some
> > application.
> > Once a person at any age has set himself up independent of
> his
> > parents,
> > has a job/business, residence, etc., he or she is free to
> make his
> > own
> > decisions about everything.
> > Some objectivists have similarly argued that when a person
> can
> > take
> > on
> > the responsibilities of adulthood, they have the right to
> make
> > their
> > own decisions. I like that idea. I would extend it by
> saying
> that
> > those
> > who cannot take on those responsibilities don't have those
> rights.
> > Those who have kids they cannot afford, and then have 15
> more
> they
> > cannot afford, are violating that. I don't think the state
> should
> > be
> > involved. I also don't think the state should subsidize
> that
> > behavior
> > through welfare, as it has been doing for decades (and yes,
> > welfare
> > does include government schools).
> > I've also learned about the history of those who have spoke
> out
> > against
> > these laws, particularly in Europe. I was surprised to see
> people
> > like
> > legendary feminist Simone de Beauvoir and philosopher Jean
> Paul
> > Sartre
> > sign a petition demanding the release of three men who had
> been
> > jailed
> > for violating age of consent laws...way back in the ancient
> times
> > of
> > 1977. These were intellectual giants with big ideas, people
> of
> > incisive
> > thought and massive reach. Some may have been statists too,
> but I
> > frankly am more in awe of statists with big minds and bid
> ideas
> > than
> > with small minded libertarians with minor-league ideas.
> Were
> those
> > giants loved and hated? Sure. Were they influential? I'd
> say
> so.
> > Let's not let the fact that we are a smaller movement make
> us
> > small
> > minded. Let's not be afraid to challenge the big, sacred
> ideas.
> > Not
> > just point out areas where they give absurd results, but
> challenge
> > their very fundamental underpinnings.
> > In a few days, there will be a meeting to consider removing
> me
> > from
> > the
> > LNC for bringing this issue up not nicely enough. But as I
> > consider
> > the
> > actions of the aforementioned great minds, I believe that I
> have
> > been,
> > perhaps, too timid.
> > Respectfully,
> > [1]Arvin Vohra
> > --
> > Arvin Vohra
>
> > [2][2][3][4]www.VoteVohra.com
> > [3][3][4][5]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> > [6](301) 320-3634
> > References
> > 1.
> [4][5][7]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> > 2. [5][6][8]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> > 3. [6]mailto:[7][9]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lnc-business mailing list
> > [7][8][10]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> > [8][9][11]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-
> business
> >
> > References
> >
> > 1. mailto:[10][12]votevohra at gmail.com
> > 2. [11][13]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> > 3. mailto:[12][14]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> > 4. [13][15]https://www.facebook.com/
> VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> > 5. [14][16]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> > 6. mailto:[15][17]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> > 7. mailto:[16][18]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> > 8. [17][19]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/
> mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lnc-business mailing list
> > [18][20]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> > [19][21]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/
> mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> [20][22]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> [21][23]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> References
> 1. mailto:[24]erin.adams at lp.org
> 2. mailto:[25]votevohra at gmail.com
> 3. [26]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 4. mailto:[27]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 5. [28]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 6. [29]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 7. mailto:[30]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 8. mailto:[31]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 9. [32]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 10. mailto:[33]votevohra at gmail.com
> 11. [34]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 12. mailto:[35]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 13. [36]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 14. [37]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 15. mailto:[38]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 16. mailto:[39]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 17. [40]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 18. mailto:[41]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 19. [42]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 20. mailto:[43]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 21. [44]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> [45]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> [46]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>
> --
> Arvin Vohra
> [47]www.VoteVohra.com
> [48]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> (301) 320-3634
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
> 2. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
> 3. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
> 4. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 5. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 6. tel:(301) 320-3634
> 7. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 8. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 9. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 10. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 11. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 12. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
> 13. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 14. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 15. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 16. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 17. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 18. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 19. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 20. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 21. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 22. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 23. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 24. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
> 25. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
> 26. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 27. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 28. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 29. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 30. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 31. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 32. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 33. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
> 34. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 35. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 36. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 37. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 38. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 39. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 40. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 41. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 42. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 43. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 44. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 45. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 46. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
> 47. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 48. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>
-------------- next part --------------
Wow. Exhibit B.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 2:03 PM Arvin Vohra <[1]votevohra at gmail.com>
wrote:
1. Is there a bylaws demanding empathy? Nope.
2. Is there some objective reason to believe that political
effectiveness requires empathy? Nope.
3. Has empathy held our movement back, in that it leads people to
refuse to speak out against things like government school use,
and
focus on things that are nice, like issues no one on earth,
including
most libertarians, know about or care about? Yes.
Here's some perspective: If we succeed in our stated platform
goals, we
will be putting millions of government employees out of work.
Sure, the
total number of jobs may increase, but those specific people will
be
unemployed. They may face major life changes. Note that we'll
also be
getting rid of welfare and government employment insurance.
People
accustomed to upper middle class life will face major changes,
often
downgrades.
Strength of will, willingness to accept the suffering of those
who
collaborated with the state, is what is required to see that
through.
Want to see the results of empathy? Take a look at our last
presidential candidate's response to a mother's incompetence, and
her
son's bad decisionmaking. We need less empathy, not more, for
this
movement to do what it needs to.
Respectfully,
Arvin Vohra
Vice Chair
Libertarian National Committee
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
<[1][2]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
Correct.
There is an utter refusal to realize this isn’t about a
perfect
philosophical point.
It is about basic judgment. A shred of empathy and
consideration.
Your continued behavior is convincing people.
Enough already.
And Daniel is right. You will just ratchet up.
I don’t consent.
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:28 AM <[1][2][3]erin.adams at lp.org>
wrote:
I agree with Mr. Hayes on this. I have been relatively
silent
throughout
this "ordeal" all the while sitting in consideration of all
"sides".
At
this point,enough is enough.
On 2018-01-18 11:20, Daniel Hayes wrote:
> Arvin,
>
> I have been a staunch “NO” on your removal. It was not
because
I
> think
> there should be no government involvement in age of
consent
because
> I
> do think there needs to be some line in the sand on
that
issue. My
> strong reluctance has been because it potentially
chills the
speech
> of
> this board’s members which should be somewhat bold
advocating
for
> Liberty. It’s never a good outcome when members of a
board
vote to
> remove their peers. We don’t want our governance of
the
> organization
> between conventions to be a circular firing squad. We
also
don’t
> want
> to encourage overall members to know that if they
exaggerate
and
> mischaracterize what someone they don’t agree with says
and
then
> jump
> up and down enough, they can have them removed. Then
there is
the
> fact
> that I personally like you.
>
> All of that said, you just don’t recognize that we are
a
POLITICAL
> PARTY. This is not about finding the exact right
philosophical
> argument. We are also dealing with people’s emotions
here.
You
> are
> still arguing the academic point. This is not about
that.
It’s
> ultimately about your lack of empathy to others on this
board,
> others
> running for office, and others in the Party and others
that
have
> been
> victims of child sexual abuse. You say families and
culture
should
> stop it. The sad reality is it is usually a family
member
that is
> the
> abuser or a trusted friend of the family or a trusted
cultural
> member
> of their community like a church leader. That is why
we need
SOME
> law
> that makes a line in the sand. Then we need to be more
diligent as
> a
> society and make greater use of jury nullification when
the
law
is
> abused as well as hold legislators to task. That said
this
is
a
> sensitive issue and you just don’t show any
sensitivity.
>
> It is your latest attempt to sway minds on the LNC that
has
swayed
> mine
> with this sentence.
>
> “But as I consider the actions of the aforementioned
great
minds, I
> believe that I have been, perhaps, too timid.”
>
> This says to me that over the next 5 month you are only
going
to
> ratchet up your rhetoric. It is with great sadness
that I
must
> consider myself as a “YES” on any vote for your
removal.
>
> Daniel Hayes LNC At Large Member
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 18, 2018, at 10:26 AM, Arvin Vohra
<[1][2][3][4]votevohra at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> A bit more information for consideration before the
upcoming
> electronic
> meeting. This is taken from my facebook page:
> Over the last few days, I've heard from many people
about
> different
> Libertarian theories of age of consent, both online
and
offline. I
> have
> become convinced that a law that I previously
considered
sort
of
> silly
> is far more deeply flawed than I realized.
> The issue with current laws is that it tries to set
the age
of
> consent
> as "the age past which sexual manipulation is
impossible,
or
> extremely
> unlikely." This is a fools errand. There is no such
age.
> Biologically, the prefrontal cortex continues
developing
until
> around
> age 25. However, the prefrontal cortex of some 25
year olds
will
> obviously be inferior to that of other 16 year olds.
> But the physical development of the prefrontal cortex
doesn't
tell
> the
> whole story. 40 year olds, because of their life
experience,
may
> have
> more impulse control than 25 year olds, as well as
more
ability to
> manipulate. Some people are, through genetics or
practice,
easily
> able
> to manipulate people their own age or older.
> And some people don't. Even the hardcore statists
haven't
gone so
> far
> as to argue that 100% of sex between teenagers and
adults
is
> problematic, that at no point in history was that
beneficial.
Some
> have
> even discussed the lasting marriages of their own
grandparents
> (and
> occasionally parents).
> Many supposed anarchists have gone running to
statism, like
the
> "brave"
> kids who run and hide behind mommy at the first sign
of,
well,
> anything.
> There are other models worth considering. The first
is the
German
> model. Yes, I know it's still statism, but it can
inform
anarchist
> and
> minarchist thought. In Germany, the age of consent is
set
low, at
> 14.
> However, if there is an age gap, and the younger
person
feels
as
> if
> he
> or she has been exploited, manipulated, etc., that
person
can
> press
> charges. This enables positive romance, and puts a
bar on
> manipulation.
> It puts the burden of responsibility on the older
person,
which is
> where it should be. American law, on the other hand,
basically say
> to
> a
> younger person who feels exploited, but was of age,
"Well
you
said
> yes,
> sucks to be you LOL!!!"
> Murray Rothbard discussed "homesteading", which has
some
> application.
> Once a person at any age has set himself up
independent of
his
> parents,
> has a job/business, residence, etc., he or she is
free to
make his
> own
> decisions about everything.
> Some objectivists have similarly argued that when a
person
can
> take
> on
> the responsibilities of adulthood, they have the
right to
make
> their
> own decisions. I like that idea. I would extend it by
saying
that
> those
> who cannot take on those responsibilities don't have
those
rights.
> Those who have kids they cannot afford, and then have
15
more
they
> cannot afford, are violating that. I don't think the
state
should
> be
> involved. I also don't think the state should
subsidize
that
> behavior
> through welfare, as it has been doing for decades
(and yes,
> welfare
> does include government schools).
> I've also learned about the history of those who have
spoke
out
> against
> these laws, particularly in Europe. I was surprised
to see
people
> like
> legendary feminist Simone de Beauvoir and philosopher
Jean
Paul
> Sartre
> sign a petition demanding the release of three men
who had
been
> jailed
> for violating age of consent laws...way back in the
ancient
times
> of
> 1977. These were intellectual giants with big ideas,
people
of
> incisive
> thought and massive reach. Some may have been
statists too,
but I
> frankly am more in awe of statists with big minds and
bid
ideas
> than
> with small minded libertarians with minor-league
ideas.
Were
those
> giants loved and hated? Sure. Were they influential?
I'd
say
so.
> Let's not let the fact that we are a smaller movement
make
us
> small
> minded. Let's not be afraid to challenge the big,
sacred
ideas.
> Not
> just point out areas where they give absurd results,
but
challenge
> their very fundamental underpinnings.
> In a few days, there will be a meeting to consider
removing
me
> from
> the
> LNC for bringing this issue up not nicely enough. But
as I
> consider
> the
> actions of the aforementioned great minds, I believe
that I
have
> been,
> perhaps, too timid.
> Respectfully,
> [1]Arvin Vohra
> --
> Arvin Vohra
> [2][2][3][4][5]www.VoteVohra.com
> [3][3][4][5][6]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> [6](301) 320-3634
> References
> 1.
[4][5][7][7]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 2. [5][6][8][8]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 3. [6]mailto:[7][9][9]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> [7][8][10][10]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
[8][9][11][11]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-
business
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:[10][12][12]votevohra at gmail.com
> 2. [11][13][13]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 3. mailto:[12][14][14]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 4. [13][15][15]https://www.facebook.com/
VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
> 5. [14][16][16]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 6. mailto:[15][17][17]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 7. mailto:[16][18][18]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> 8. [17][19][19]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/
mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> [18][20][20]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> [19][21][21]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/
mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
[20][22][22]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
[21][23][23]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
References
1. mailto:[24][24]erin.adams at lp.org
2. mailto:[25][25]votevohra at gmail.com
3. [26][26]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
4. mailto:[27][27]VoteVohra at gmail.com
5.
[28][28]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
6. [29][29]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
7. mailto:[30][30]VoteVohra at gmail.com
8. mailto:[31][31]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
9.
[32][32]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
10. mailto:[33][33]votevohra at gmail.com
11. [34][34]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
12. mailto:[35][35]VoteVohra at gmail.com
13.
[36][36]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
14. [37][37]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
15. mailto:[38][38]VoteVohra at gmail.com
16. mailto:[39][39]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
17.
[40][40]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
18. mailto:[41][41]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
19.
[42][42]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
20. mailto:[43][43]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
21.
[44][44]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
[45][45]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
[46][46]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
--
Arvin Vohra
[47][47]www.VoteVohra.com
[48][48]VoteVohra at gmail.com
(301) 320-3634
References
1. mailto:[49]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
2. mailto:[50]erin.adams at lp.org
3. mailto:[51]votevohra at gmail.com
4. [52]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
5. mailto:[53]VoteVohra at gmail.com
6. tel:(301) 320-3634
7. [54]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
8. [55]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
9. mailto:[56]VoteVohra at gmail.com
10. mailto:[57]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
11. [58]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
12. mailto:[59]votevohra at gmail.com
13. [60]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
14. mailto:[61]VoteVohra at gmail.com
15. [62]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
16. [63]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
17. mailto:[64]VoteVohra at gmail.com
18. mailto:[65]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
19. [66]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
20. mailto:[67]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
21. [68]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
22. mailto:[69]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
23. [70]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
24. mailto:[71]erin.adams at lp.org
25. mailto:[72]votevohra at gmail.com
26. [73]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
27. mailto:[74]VoteVohra at gmail.com
28. [75]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
29. [76]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
30. mailto:[77]VoteVohra at gmail.com
31. mailto:[78]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
32. [79]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
33. mailto:[80]votevohra at gmail.com
34. [81]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
35. mailto:[82]VoteVohra at gmail.com
36. [83]https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
37. [84]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
38. mailto:[85]VoteVohra at gmail.com
39. mailto:[86]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
40. [87]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
41. mailto:[88]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
42. [89]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
43. mailto:[90]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
44. [91]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
45. mailto:[92]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
46. [93]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
47. [94]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
48. mailto:[95]VoteVohra at gmail.com
_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
[96]Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
[97]http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
References
1. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
2. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
3. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
4. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
5. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
6. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
7. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
8. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
9. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
10. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
11. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-
12. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
13. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
14. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
15. https://www.facebook.com/
16. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
17. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
18. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
19. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/
20. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
21. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/
22. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
23. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
24. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
25. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
26. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
27. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
28. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
29. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
30. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
31. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
32. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
33. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
34. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
35. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
36. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
37. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
38. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
39. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
40. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
41. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
42. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
43. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
44. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
45. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
46. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
47. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
48. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
49. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
50. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
51. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
52. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
53. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
54. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
55. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
56. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
57. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
58. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
59. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
60. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
61. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
62. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
63. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
64. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
65. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
66. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
67. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
68. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
69. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
70. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
71. mailto:erin.adams at lp.org
72. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
73. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
74. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
75. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
76. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
77. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
78. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
79. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
80. mailto:votevohra at gmail.com
81. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
82. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
83. https://www.facebook.com/VohraEducation/?fref=mentions
84. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
85. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
86. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
87. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
88. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
89. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
90. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
91. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
92. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
93. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
94. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
95. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
96. mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
97. http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list