[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-05: Suspension of Arvin Vohra
Caryn Ann Harlos
caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Thu Apr 5 11:30:24 EDT 2018
**raises hand**
I don't know what debate you are in but it doesn't appear to be this one.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 8:11 AM, <david.demarest at lp.org> wrote:
> The Libertarian Party was born from the radical ideas introduced by Ayn
> Rand. She was not a Libertarian and did not like Libertarians, perhaps
> because she thought they were stealing her ideas and misinterpreting
> them. And interpret them, they did. Rand absolutely nailed the moral
> justification for reason, rational self-interest, and laissez faire
> capitalism. Rand was a Minarchist and perhaps a mild chauvinist. She
> suggested that top-down leaders should be men, not women. The radicals
> that created the LP built the party and Statement of Principles by
> taking Rand's admirable intellectual process a step further. They had
> the temerity and courage to examine the moral justification for
> government, or lack thereof. Make no mistake, the LP was born of
> radical, controversial ideas expressed with passion that grew the
> movement exponentially based largely on Rand's ideas that filled the
> intellectual vacuum that existed prior to the release of ‘Atlas
> Shrugged’.
>
>
> As many intellectual movements do, at least at the top-down political
> level, the Libertarian Party gradually moved away from its radical
> roots, ostensibly to avoid scaring off voters. Then along came Dr. Ron
> Paul. His radical interpretation of what was wrong with government and
> specific remedies reinvigorated the LP and generated a huge following,
> especially among the young. Many Libertarians, both radicals and
> moderates, that were inspired by both Ayn Rand and Dr. Ron Paul,
> disagree with specific points in Rand’s and Dr. Paul’s Libertarian
> world views, particularly on the issue of Minarchism versus
> Voluntaryism.
>
>
> Our specific ideological disagreements, however, cannot obscure the
> fact that radical, controversial ideas, expressed passionately by
> inspirational leaders, such and Rand and Dr. Paul, were and will
> continue to be the driving force that sustains the broader Libertarian
> movement. The question is whether the political arm of the movement,
> the Libertarian Party, will follow suit, inspire others with our
> intellectual courage, and lead by example with new and controversial
> ideas. Or will we apologize to voters for our principles and gradually
> drift toward the fate of the old parties that blatantly appease voters
> to win hollow political victories really aimed at gaining authority
> over others.
> Who among us will have the intellectual foresight, creativity, courage,
> and passion necessary to introduce new and controversial ideas that
> will inspire non-Libertarians to vote for Libertarian candidates, win
> meaningful elections at all levels to obtain regulatory relief, and
> upsize the voluntary market sector while downsizing the coercive
> statist sector? Who among us will be the next Ayn Rand or Dr. Ron Paul
> to reinvigorate and re-radicalize the Libertarian Party in our quest
> for freedom, nothing more, nothing less, for all people?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lnc-business <lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org> On Behalf Of
> Starchild
> Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 5:55 AM
> To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-05: Suspension of Arvin
> Vohra
>
>
>
> Caryn Ann,
>
>
> No worries about not being able to take my call, I know
> you do an incredible amount of work for the party and certainly don't
> begrudge you your family time. And I appreciate your kind words about
> my creativity and writing ability. I think the latter can be rather
> hit-or-miss – I don't always feel particularly articulate, and
> sometimes I can just be lazy or sloppy. Your essay below is very well
> written by the way, even though the tone is informal.
>
>
> I'm not aware of ContraPoints, although I do consume a
> wide variety of media from different viewpoints both left and right as
> well as libertarian, as I agree it's good to be familiar with the
> arguments for their respective brands of statism. Will try to check
> that out.
>
>
> I can look at pages on the "F" site now, if someone
> sends me a link, I just can't post there without an account. Aside from
> my desire not to contribute to the problem of society entrusting
> certain companies with too much power, the problem with creating a
> dummy account on that site in order to see what Libertarians are saying
> there is that people would naturally want to know who I am before
> friending me, and that process of getting into everybody's friend
> networks to see the conversations would naturally take some time.
> Meanwhile, as it became commonly known among members of our community
> that Account X was me under a different name, it seems inevitable that
> someone not wanting my voice there for whatever reason(s) would
> anonymously report me and get it shut down.
>
>
>
> > ==I'm aware that the pledge wasn't designed as a litmus test.==
>
> > Then you conceded my point.
>
>
>
> You seem to be under the impression that I was trying
> to say it was designed as a litmus test. That's not what I was trying
> to say. I was recognizing that it IS a kind of litmus test, but that we
> could use a better one.
>
>
>
> > He has walked back statements and apologized for bad implications.
> That is the charitable reading. Or you are saying he passive
> aggressively just said I am sorry you are such crybabies.
>
>
> I think there's a difference between walking back
> specific phrasing that caused offense, and disavowing the underlying
> message that readers would naturally get from a post, which I'm not
> aware of him doing until now.
>
>
> But to get to the heart of this. While there are
> various individual points of your argument with which I am in
> agreement, the overall caricature you paint of Arvin just doesn't
> square with the observations of my own senses – the talk of "mind
> games", "gaslighting", "bad actors", "trolls", "edgelords" (this sounds
> like something out of a sci-fi novel!), posts that "ooze with glee",
> "enjoy(ing) what (he) put(s) others through", etc. – none of this
> accords with my personal sense of the individual I've come to know
> during two terms on the LNC.
>
>
> I'm not saying YOU are trying to "gaslight" us; I don't
> doubt your sincerity. But take a step back and think about the kind of
> person that Arvin would have to be, in order for all the stuff you're
> saying about him to be true, and (for everyone) ask yourselves whether
> that's really the same person we've known on this committee.
>
>
> Love & Liberty,
>
>
> ((( starchild )))
>
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> [1]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> (415) 625-FREE
>
> @StarchildSF
>
>
>
> On Apr 4, 2018, at 12:12 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
>
> > Starchild, we are not going to change each other's minds. I could
> not
>
> > take your calls as I was recording live for the LP. Also honestly,
> I
>
> > am not sacrificing any more family time for Arvin. Any time I do
> will
>
> > be getting on the phone with members who now think the LP is not
> for
>
> > them - that non-edgelords need not apply. Yes, I get those calls.
>
> > ==Not sure what you mean by "I know how our members are". ...When
> you
>
> > refer to
>
> > "the world of social media", which other sites are you talking
>
> > about?==
>
> > How members are taking it. On Facebeast.
>
> > == Again it sounds like you are referring to some post or posts
> other
>
> > than
>
> > what you sent me, which mentioned only school boards, not
> parents.==
>
> > Starchild at this point it is incumbent on you to get a dummy
> account
>
> > and research and see for yourself.
>
> > ==The motion does more than "cite" the censure, it repeats the
> language
>
> > given then as justification for censure, and now uses that
> language
>
> > as
>
> > justification for suspension (which was previously rejected).===
>
> > That is what citing is. And it was rejected as not enough THEN, so
>
> > censure, in which the next step is removal. That is the progression
> of
>
> > professional discipline.
>
> > ==The only
>
> > thing I'm aware of that's changed since then is Arvin made one
>
> > ill-advised post which he said was a joke in poor taste and he
> has
>
> > disavowed (out of god knows how many other things he's posted
> during
>
> > the intervening weeks).===
>
> > First Starchild, I think you may be aware of the YouTuber
>
> > ContraPoints. Excellent liberal commentator for people to get out
> of
>
> > the Milo echo chamber and hear good liberal defenses. I don't
> agree
>
> > with her, but I respect her immensely. She talks about the
> difficulty
>
> > of dealing with ethno nationalists - who say all the fashy things
> but
>
> > then deny it. There comes a point where it is a body of evidence.
> The
>
> > analogy here is to how gaslighting works NOT any idea that anyone
> here
>
> > is fashy (OBVIOUSLY NO ONE HERE IS) - just showing how these things
>
> > work and how Libertarians are often hoodwinked. I can send you the
>
> > link to her video - it is fantastic, and I think you would love her
> as
>
> > a person. She reminds me of you with her creative genius. Back to
>
> > Arvin, It was more than ill-advised, it was inexcusable for a
> leader of
>
> > the LP. Just like it would be inexcusable for a leader of the ADL
> to
>
> > make a "get into the ovens" "joke." Apologies and alleged
> disavowing
>
> > (many many people do not believe it because again, he goes on to
> talk
>
> > about WHEN it is acceptable in the same sentence - taking away any
>
> > genuineness or utility of any disavowal and is why I don't buy his
>
> > later disavowal either - I just don't. I'm a wise old bird when it
>
> > comes to these mind games) do not make everything okay. This is
>
> > repeated behaviour and it is enough. I was once in an abusive
>
> > marriage. Yes he apologized. Many times. But there came a time
> when
>
> > it was enough. And my ex genuinely wanted to do better (or
> convinced
>
> > me he did) - Arvin has promised us he will be worse. His words
> ring
>
> > hollow particularly when coupled with a call to defend taking up
> arms
>
> > and lethal force.
>
> > ==Which statements has Arvin retracted in the past? I think he's
>
> > apologized for upsetting people with other posts, but that he
> stood
>
> > by
>
> > the basic positions taken therein.===
>
> > He has walked back statements and apologized for bad implications.
>
> > That is the charitable reading. Or you are saying he passive
>
> > aggressively just said I am sorry you are such crybabies. He is
>
> > standing by this basic position too - it is not very utilitarian to
>
> > shoot up school boards and to HIM it may not be proportional - but
> you
>
> > know, they are the enemy and their collaborators. You simply have
> to
>
> > read carefully. Its in the very post here - why do you think two
>
> > people changed to YES - AFTER reading his "defense." Because it
> read
>
> > like a fertilizer bomb. Our words have impact. I watched some
>
> > specials on what drove McVeigh to his horrific act - mixing bad
>
> > government with reckless rhetoric and a healthy dose of nuttiness
> and a
>
> > big kaboom comes out. Free speech is not consequenceless speech.
> That
>
> > girl who goaded her male friend over text to just kill himself and
> he
>
> > did - she didn't kill him. He still had agency. It is a danger of
>
> > free speech, but it doesn't make her speech noble or good. Our
> words -
>
> > as leaders - have influence. We took these positions knowing that.
>
> > Libertarians believe in responsibility. Part of that
> responsibility is
>
> > that you don't as a leader in the third largest political party in
> the
>
> > US in a politically violent time, OVER THE BODIES OF DEAD TEENS,
> "joke"
>
> > about murdering school board officials - when we run school board
>
> > officials!!! By Arvin's logic, we are enemy collaborators. Many
>
> > anarchists of his POV think so. This anarchist does not.
>
> > ==I'm aware that the pledge wasn't designed as a litmus test.==
>
> > Then you conceded my point. It was put in place as a barrier, a
>
> > protection, to OUR MEMBERS. Which our Vice Chair blithely "joked
>
> > away." Not acceptable. Not okay. And another note ends up in many
>
> > members files due to Arvin. Its all fun and games until shit gets
>
> > real. He either was so obtuse and tone deaf to make such an
>
> > inappropriate "joke" (coupled with his past inappropriate comments
>
> > about preferring that little girls get impregnated by much older
> men
>
> > with jobs rather than an equally confused kid) OR he meant it. OR
>
> > potentially a combination of both. "Jokes" are often "funny" to
> the
>
> > people who make them because there is some small grain of truth in
> them
>
> > to the maker and to the audience. We laugh at inappropriate
>
> > stereotypes because there ARE some people like that (the problem is
>
> > making a whole GROUP like that and making neutral characteristics
> to be
>
> > malignant or bad when it is just people being people). To wit,
> there
>
> > are a lot of radical leftist feminists with pink hair. I am not
> one of
>
> > them. But people laugh when that joke is made towards me. It is
> funny
>
> > because here is some truth. And then I get an opportunity to show
> how
>
> > stupid collectivization is. What kernel of truth did Arvin find SO
>
> > FUNNY? That he juxtaposed it with the murder of children!?:! As a
>
> > political leader????? There are people who make "rape jokes." I
>
> > question what in the person exists for them to even consider that a
>
> > "joke" unless it was to show some underlying truth through dark
> evil.
>
> > What underlying truth is there in this? Not to mention that THIS
> IS A
>
> > PATTERN. Arvin has had for months - quite seriously - made posts
> that
>
> > follow the pattern of Bad Idea: XXXX, Good Idea: XXXXX or more
>
> > frequently Bad Idea XXXX, Worse Idea XXXXX. So he then goes and
> says
>
> > Bad Idea school shootings. Good Idea School Board Shootings, and
> no
>
> > everyone is supposed to magically know that THIS one was not
> serious.
>
> > That he broke character. (it also troubles me that he admits he
>
> > wouldn't say that on FB but WeMe (or whatever silly name it is) is
>
> > edgier so its all okay..... so perhaps helicopter ride jokes are
> also
>
> > okay, you just gotta be down with the Hoppe dudes to make them).
>
> > Why do we find it so ironic when the fundamentalist theocrat who
> rails
>
> > against gay people is found in bed with another of the same sex.
> Not
>
> > because we think he should not have the right or any moral judgment
>
> > about the intimate act. We rightly note the hypocrisy of a person
> who
>
> > is part of a movement that condemns others for such things doing
> such
>
> > things. We are a movement built on PEACE and non-initiation of
> force.
>
> > To have one of our leaders make a joke out of our cardinal
> principle
>
> > tickles the same sense of wrongness. Mother Theresa could get away
>
> > with a nun joke. She couldn't get away with a joke about starving
>
> > Indian children, even if she apologized. That is not thought
> police.
>
> > That is not unLibertarian. It is sheer meritocracy.
>
> > There are no words I can explain this better with Starchild. You
> are
>
> > brilliant and can out-write me on any day of the week and twice on
>
> > Sunday. But you are off base here, and I think lost in a
> Libertopia
>
> > where there are not bad actors and trolls and destructive edgelords
>
> > that act that way because they enjoy what they put others through.
> Our
>
> > failure to see and deal with is evidence that dangerous sociopaths
> (NO,
>
> > that is not what I am saying is going on here) would have a field
> day
>
> > in "our world" because we would buy their silver-tongued
>
> > "explanations." We have got the gentle as doves part down pat. We
>
> > need to brush up on the wise as serpents part.
>
> > I'm done. I have spilled my ration of digital ink.
>
> > What is even worse about what Arvin has done - and his posts over
> it
>
> > ooze with glee - he is fracturing us with all the zeal of the High
>
> > Septon -- the Party will not be pure until she is stripped and
> paraded
>
> > through the streets in atonement for our sins of a ticket that
> didn't
>
> > always stick to libertarian principles. That isn't what he was
> elected
>
> > to do. He did have recourse as Vice Chair - he could have moved to
>
> > disqualify them. He did not. He can resign and not have the
> weight of
>
> > this responsibility if he wishes. Life involves choices, and we
> chose
>
> > these roles and responsibilities.
>
> > This is a cumulative case of which the "lets murder the school
> board"
>
> > "joke" is just the latest. He was censured. That is a
> probationary
>
> > warning. He didn't take heed and picked the one thing that holds us
>
> > together - the membership pledge of non-aggression - as the butt of
> his
>
> > "joke" built on the youthful victims who woke up that day wondering
>
> > about how much homework they would have or if their crush was still
> mad
>
> > at them - not contemplating that those same bodies carefully
> dressed
>
> > and ready would within hours be cold and dead and the only clothing
>
> > that would matter would be the attire they would be buried in.
>
> > Let me play the Septa for a moment and say.... "shame."
>
> >
>
> > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 11:39 PM, Starchild <[1][2]starchild at lp.org>
> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Caryn Ann,
>
> > My further responses interspersed below...
>
> > On Apr 3, 2018, at 6:03 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> > ==When you say "He defended the morality of violence against
>
> > all
>
> > 'enemy
>
> > collaborators' such as teachers and school boards", I don't
>
> > know to
>
> > which statement(s) you are referring, so I don't know if I'd
>
> > interpret
>
> > them as you apparently are.==
>
> > I know how our members are. Yes you are absent from the
> world
>
> > of
>
> > social media - where the damage is happening. He is opposed
> to
>
> > violence against the state because it doesn't work but goads
>
> > people
>
> > to
>
> > follow the trail of when it is moral to use guns against
> these
>
> > people
>
> > Not sure what you mean by "I know how our members are". I
> don't
>
> > use the
>
> > social media site that starts with an "F", but I'm on Twitter,
>
> > numerous
>
> > email lists (including the Radical Caucus list, which it would
> be
>
> > cool
>
> > if the caucus actually used!). I just joined MeWe. When you
> refer
>
> > to
>
> > "the world of social media", which other sites are you talking
>
> > about?
>
> > --- my example of the joking abortion clinic bomber is apt -
>
> > language
>
> > means something and has consequences.
>
> > == I also defend the MORALITY* of violence in self defense
> or
>
> > defense
>
> > of others (as long as it's proportionate) as I think
>
> > non-pacifist
>
> > libertarians generally do; that doesn't mean I think it's
>
> > necessarily
>
> > a
>
> > good idea, or the path I want to follow.==
>
> > I do too. That was never the point. You are not doing it
> in
>
> > the
>
> > context of a school shooting, venomous rhetoric against
>
> > teachers AND
>
> > parents, and then claiming it was a "joke" and goading
> people
>
> > to
>
> > consider just when they might pick up a gun against these
>
> > people.
>
> > Again it sounds like you are referring to some post or posts
>
> > other than
>
> > what you sent me, which mentioned only school boards, not
>
> > parents.
>
> > ==The fact of Arvin having already been censured (and having
>
> > already
>
> > faced removal) using the same language is a good reason not
> to
>
> > rely
>
> > on
>
> > that language referring to previous actions now. Seems a lot
>
> > like
>
> > double jeopardy.===
>
> > It is perfectly a good reason since censure is meant as a
>
> > WARNING,
>
> > and
>
> > citing the warning when taking the next step is how reality
>
> > works.
>
> > The motion does more than "cite" the censure, it repeats the
>
> > language
>
> > given then as justification for censure, and now uses that
>
> > language as
>
> > justification for suspension (which was previously rejected).
> The
>
> > only
>
> > thing I'm aware of that's changed since then is Arvin made one
>
> > ill-advised post which he said was a joke in poor taste and he
>
> > has
>
> > disavowed (out of god knows how many other things he's posted
>
> > during
>
> > the intervening weeks).
>
> > ==And as I've said, I DON'T think his post was acceptable.
> If
>
> > he
>
> > hadn't
>
> > retracted it, I would have joined in asking him to resign,
> and
>
> > if he
>
> > didn't, possibly supported an APPROPRIATELY-WORDED motion
> for
>
> > suspension.==
>
> > Funny that, he keeps making horrid statements and
> "retracting"
>
> > them.
>
> > And promising more. I think you are being gullible beyond
>
> > belief and
>
> > excusing the inexcusable.
>
> > Which statements has Arvin retracted in the past? I think he's
>
> > apologized for upsetting people with other posts, but that he
>
> > stood by
>
> > the basic positions taken therein. That's different than what
>
> > he's
>
> > saying in this case � here's what he just posted on MeWe:
>
> > "Today, I�m being accused of advocating violence. Frankly,
>
> > that�s false. Like many of you, I have said that the Second
>
> > Amendment
>
> > is for defending yourself against government. I�ve also,
>
> > repeatedly
>
> > pointed out that a violent revolution is neither necessary nor
>
> > likely
>
> > to work. I�ve advocated against violence, even morally
>
> > justified
>
> > violence, repeatedly. I�ve even advocated against
> �legal�
>
> > violence done
>
> > by the state, and encouraged young men and women to find
>
> > nonviolent
>
> > work, rather than join the military.
>
> > I don�t advocate violence. I don�t support it. I don�t
>
> > support �legal�
>
> > violence done by the state. I don�t support morally
> justified
>
> > violence
>
> > against the state. I oppose violence in every form.
>
> > Did I make a joke about violence? Yes. Did I also apologize
> and
>
> > clarify
>
> > my position a few hours later? Yes. Did I emphasize my
> opposition
>
> > to
>
> > violence? Yes.
>
> > I�ve been very clear about my positions. I know many of you
>
> > don�t agree
>
> > with them, but I haven�t said �Haha, just kidding,�
> because
>
> > I was never
>
> > kidding. Military service is immoral, because U.S. foreign
> policy
>
> > is
>
> > immoral. Government school involvement is immoral, because
> theft
>
> > is immoral. Age of consent laws, which have the state usurp
>
> > natural
>
> > rights that stem from self ownership as well as family rights,
>
> > are
>
> > also immoral. I continue to stand by each of those positions.
>
> > But I�m not standing by a joke taken literally, because it
> is a
>
> > joke taken literally. A joke in poor taste, as I�ve clearly
>
> > stated, but
>
> > a joke nonetheless."
>
> > ===I know why the non-aggression pledge exists, and am a
> strong
>
> > supporter of it. In fact I think it should probably be
>
> > strengthened
>
> > (require members to meet a stronger litmus test, such as
>
> > scoring some
>
> > minimum on the Nolan Chart, in order to hold leadership
>
> > positions in
>
> > the party).==
>
> > I suspect you don't, since it was never a LITMUS test to
> begin
>
> > with
>
> > no
>
> > matter how much we would like it to be so.
>
> > From David Nolan, Interestingly, most people in the LP do
> not
>
> > know
>
> > why
>
> > it was originally placed on membership applications. We did
> it
>
> > not
>
> > because we believed that we could keep out "bad" people by
>
> > asking
>
> > them
>
> > to sign--after all, evil people will lie to achieve their
>
> > ends--but
>
> > to
>
> > provide some evidence that the LP was not a group advocating
>
> > violent
>
> > overthrow of the gov't. In the early 70's, memories of
> Nixon's
>
> > "enemies
>
> > list" and the McCarthy hearings of the 50's were still fresh
> in
>
> > people's minds, and we wanted to protect ourselves from
> future
>
> > witch-hunts.^[1][2]
>
> > I'm aware that the pledge wasn't designed as a litmus test.
> It's
>
> > better
>
> > than nothing, but the language leaves much room for
>
> > interpretation.
>
> > Which is why I think it would be helpful to have something
> more
>
> > specific, like asking people's positions on a sampling of
> civil
>
> > liberties, economic freedom, and war/peace/nationalism
> questions.
>
> > Love & Liberty,
>
> > ((( starchild )))
>
> > At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> > [1][2][3]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > (415) 625-FREE
>
> > @StarchildSF
>
> > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:37 PM, Starchild
>
> > <[2][3][4]starchild at lp.org>
>
> >
>
> > wrote:
>
> > Caryn Ann,
>
> > When you say "He defended the morality of violence
>
> > against
>
> > all 'enemy collaborators' such as teachers and school
> boards", I
>
> > don't know to which statement(s) you are referring, so I
> don't
>
> > know
>
> > if I'd interpret them as you apparently are.
>
> > I also defend the MORALITY* of violence in self
> defense
>
> > or
>
> > defense of others (as long as it's proportionate) as I think
>
> > non-pacifist libertarians generally do; that doesn't mean I
>
> > think
>
> > it's necessarily a good idea, or the path I want to follow.
>
> > "Given that this body already censured him using that same
>
> > language..."
>
> > The fact of Arvin having already been censured (and
>
> > having
>
> > already faced removal) using the same language is a good
> reason
>
> > not
>
> > to rely on that language referring to previous actions now.
>
> > Seems a
>
> > lot like double jeopardy.
>
> > And as I've said, I DON'T think his post was
> acceptable.
>
> > If
>
> > he hadn't retracted it, I would have joined in asking him to
>
> > resign,
>
> > and if he didn't, possibly supported an APPROPRIATELY-WORDED
>
> > motion
>
> > for suspension.
>
> > I know why the non-aggression pledge exists, and am
> a
>
> > strong
>
> > supporter of it. In fact I think it should probably be
>
> > strengthened
>
> > (require members to meet a stronger litmus test, such as
> scoring
>
> > some minimum on the Nolan Chart, in order to hold leadership
>
> > positions in the party).
>
> > Love & Liberty,
>
> > ((( starchild )))
>
> > At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> >
>
> > [3][4][5]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> >
>
> > (415) 625-FREE
>
> > @StarchildSF
>
> > *Apologies for the use of CAPS for emphasis, but italics and
>
> > boldface still don't work on this list since our switch to
> new
>
> > email
>
> > servers.
>
> > On Apr 3, 2018, at 3:31 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> > Starchild--
>
> > ==I've seen no convincing argument that anything else
>
> > you've posted has been in violation of the Non-Aggression
>
> > Principle,===
>
> > Because you fall into the trap of the game of saying
> something
>
> > different later. He defended the morality of violence
> against
>
> > all
>
> > "enemy collaborators" such as teachers and school boards.
>
> > == yet the "Whereas" clause citing that principle as a
> preamble
>
> > to
>
> > accusing you of "sustained and repeated unacceptable
> conduct
>
> > that
>
> > brings the principles of the Libertarian Party into
> disrepute"
>
> > appears
>
> > to take it as a given==
>
> > Given that this body already censured him using that same
>
> > language,
>
> > it
>
> > IS a given.
>
> > ==And does anyone really believe that an
>
> > ill-advised social media posting which has been disavowed
> is
>
> > enough
>
> > to
>
> > "endanger the survival" [emphasis added] of the LP, let
> alone
>
> > the
>
> > entire freedom movement? This is gross exaggeration.==
>
> > I do. The Party founders did. Your statements are in
> ignorance
>
> > of
>
> > the
>
> > history of WHY we have that pledge to begin with.
>
> > == What is perhaps most troubling is the lack of
> acknowledgment
>
> > that
>
> > routinely failing to take strongly libertarian positions
> poses
>
> > a
>
> > far
>
> > greater risk to the party, the movement, and the security
> of
>
> > party
>
> > members and members of society alike from State violence,
> than
>
> > does
>
> > someone occasionally going too far.==
>
> > I don't have a scale of what harms more, but talking about an
>
> > exaggeration, I routinely rail against failure to take
> strongly
>
> > libertarian positions. This is not an either/or.
>
> > But your vote is your vote - you think a wink/wink joke about
>
> > violence
>
> > in the whole context of his rhetoric is acceptable. Let's
> say a
>
> > pro-lifers routinely called doctors murderers and accessories
> to
>
> > murder
>
> > (or let's say - enemy collaborators) and then "joked" about
>
> > bombing
>
> > an
>
> > abortion clinic --- how would that fly? Like a lead
> zeppelin.
>
> > Just
>
> > like this does.
>
> > Once again we prove that freedom must mean that bullies get
> to
>
> > walk
>
> > all
>
> > over people, conduct outrageous acts, and there is no will to
>
> > disassociate. The LNC is the biggest proof that voluntary
>
> > government
>
> > will not protect the vulnerable - we can't even take care of
> our
>
> > own
>
> > problems.
>
> >
>
> > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Starchild
>
> > <[1][4][5][6]starchild at lp.org>
>
> >
>
> > wrote:
>
> > Arvin,
>
> > As I wrote in a previous message here, my reading of
> your
>
> > social
>
> > media
>
> > post is that it was over the line, and unlike any of
> your
>
> > previous
>
> > posts, actually did appear to advocate for the
> initiation of
>
> > force.
>
> > Since the post at that time had apparently not been made
>
> > public,
>
> > and
>
> > was not made in an LP forum, it was my hope that we
> would
>
> > not
>
> > risk
>
> > damaging the party's reputation by officially taking it
> up
>
> > here
>
> > and
>
> > thereby making it public and an official party matter,
> but
>
> > rather
>
> > call
>
> > for your resignation as individuals.
>
> > While I don't disagree with you as far as the moral �
> as
>
> > opposed to
>
> > practical � justification for defensive violence
> against
>
> > individuals
>
> > who are causing aggression, not all government personnel
> fit
>
> > into
>
> > that
>
> > category. There are Libertarian Party members and others
>
> > serving
>
> > on
>
> > school boards who are fighting to reduce aggression, not
>
> > increase
>
> > it,
>
> > and an implicit sanction of indiscriminate violence
> against
>
> > such
>
> > a
>
> > broad category of people in government would amount to a
>
> > willingness to
>
> > sacrifice such individuals as "collateral damage" in
>
> > contravention of
>
> > their individual rights.
>
> > However, you have disavowed and apologized for the post,
> and
>
> > said
>
> > enough here about routinely arguing against the use of
>
> > violence
>
> > against
>
> > the State and for the use of minimal force and the
>
> > nonviolent
>
> > approach
>
> > advocated by Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi, to
> make
>
> > that
>
> > disavowal credible. If anyone attempts to use this to
> attack
>
> > the
>
> > LP,
>
> > now that it has been officially raised in a motion here,
>
> > they
>
> > will have
>
> > to overcome the fact that this was a personal post by
> one LP
>
> > official
>
> > who subsequently retracted it and apologized for his
> words
>
> > as
>
> > having
>
> > been a joke in poor taste.
>
> > While I wish you would better think some of these things
>
> > through
>
> > before
>
> > posting, I don't see a personal post by an LNC member on
> a
>
> > social
>
> > media
>
> > site, not in the name of the party, which the member has
>
> > clearly
>
> > retracted and apologized for as having been an
> inappropriate
>
> > joke, as
>
> > sufficient cause for involuntary removal from office.
> Mere
>
> > poor
>
> > judgment in the matter of deciding what to post via
> one's
>
> > personal
>
> > social media accounts seems less important to me on the
>
> > whole
>
> > than poor
>
> > judgment in deciding how to vote on substantive party
>
> > matters,
>
> > and if I
>
> > had to rank each member of the LNC on that basis, you
> would
>
> > not
>
> > come
>
> > out at the bottom. I'm also mindful of your apparent
> state
>
> > of
>
> > mind,
>
> > which again seems to reflect an excess of healthy
>
> > libertarian
>
> > sentiment
>
> > against the aggression and abuses of the State, rather
> than
>
> > a
>
> > lack of
>
> > it. I accept your retraction and apology.
>
> > From the wording of the motion for suspension, it
> appears
>
> > that
>
> > some
>
> > members of this body are again seeking your involuntary
>
> > removal
>
> > � this
>
> > time without the due process of holding a meeting � on
>
> > account
>
> > of
>
> > previous posts for which you have already been censured.
>
> > Furthermore I believe the wording of the motion is
> sloppy
>
> > and
>
> > contains
>
> > inaccuracies. I've seen no convincing argument that
> anything
>
> > else
>
> > you've posted has been in violation of the
> Non-Aggression
>
> > Principle,
>
> > yet the "Whereas" clause citing that principle as a
> preamble
>
> > to
>
> > accusing you of "sustained and repeated unacceptable
> conduct
>
> > that
>
> > brings the principles of the Libertarian Party into
>
> > disrepute"
>
> > appears
>
> > to take it as a given that you've repeatedly acted in
>
> > contravention of
>
> > this as well as other unnamed principles. It is also
>
> > inaccurate
>
> > to
>
> > speak of you bringing the principles of the Libertarian
>
> > Party
>
> > into
>
> > disrepute. Bringing a group's adherence to principles
> into
>
> > disrepute is
>
> > not the same as bringing the principles themselves into
>
> > disrepute. The
>
> > principles stand regardless of how often or how
> egregiously
>
> > members of
>
> > society violate them. And does anyone really believe
> that an
>
> > ill-advised social media posting which has been
> disavowed is
>
> > enough to
>
> > "endanger the survival" [emphasis added] of the LP, let
>
> > alone
>
> > the
>
> > entire freedom movement? This is gross exaggeration.
>
> > What is perhaps most troubling is the lack of
> acknowledgment
>
> > that
>
> > routinely failing to take strongly libertarian positions
>
> > poses
>
> > a
>
> > far
>
> > greater risk to the party, the movement, and the
> security of
>
> > party
>
> > members and members of society alike from State
> violence,
>
> > than
>
> > does
>
> > someone occasionally going too far.
>
> > I vote no on the motion.
>
> > Love & Liberty,
>
> > ((( starchild )))
>
> > At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> >
>
> >
> [1][2][5][6]RealReform at earthlink.
>
> > net
>
> > (415) 625-FREE
>
> > @StarchildSF
>
> > On Apr 3, 2018, at 7:33 AM, Arvin Vohra wrote:
>
> > Since some were unable to see my video response to
> this,
>
> > here is
>
> > something else I posted on mewe on this issue:
>
> > As you may have heard, some on the LNC are once again
>
> > working to
>
> > suspend me from the LNC, based on an inappropriate
> joke I
>
> > made on
>
> > [1][3][6][7]mewe.com. The joke was in poor taste, and
> I
>
> > have
>
> >
>
> > already
>
> > apologized
>
> > for it, and clarified my actual position (specifically,
> that
>
> > I
>
> > don't
>
> > advocate for shooting school boards. I would have
> considered
>
> > that
>
> > obvious, but sometimes tone gets lost in social media).
>
> > But it is, I have to say, interesting to see the
> cognitive
>
> > dissonance
>
> > that is growing within the Libertarian Party. Every day,
> I
>
> > hear
>
> > taxation is theft. We even have new LP t-shirts that say
>
> > taxation
>
> > is
>
> > theft (they are a great way to support the LP and spread
> the
>
> > message).
>
> > We agree that taxation is an immoral violation of your
>
> > sacred
>
> > rights.
>
> > We also have routinely argued that guns are not for
> hunting,
>
> > they
>
> > are
>
> > for opposing government overreach. I've spoken
> officially on
>
> > this
>
> > issue. I've said this to cheering Libertarian and
>
> > Conservative
>
> > groups,
>
> > to furious progressive groups. I know many of you have
> made
>
> > the
>
> > same
>
> > argument.
>
> > We talk about how wrong it is for the government to rob
> us
>
> > and
>
> > use
>
> > the
>
> > money for immoral actions like the drug war, foreign
> wars,
>
> > and
>
> > government schools. A few minutes later, we talk about
> how
>
> > guns
>
> > are
>
> > necessary to block government tyranny and overreach.
>
> > I've routinely argued against any violence against the
>
> > state,
>
> > since I
>
> > consider it unlikely to work. But for all the hardcore
> gun
>
> > supporters
>
> > who wear taxation is theft t-shirts: what is the level
> of
>
> > tyranny
>
> > that
>
> > would be great enough to morally justify using violence
> in
>
> > self
>
> > defense?
>
> > Is being locked up in a government rape cage for a
>
> > victimless
>
> > crime
>
> > not
>
> > enough moral justification? Is having your son or
> daughter
>
> > locked
>
> > up
>
> > in
>
> > such a rape cage not enough justification? Is being
> robbed
>
> > to
>
> > have
>
> > your
>
> > money used to bomb people in other countries, in your
> name
>
> > not
>
> > enough?
>
> > What level of tyranny would morally justify using the
> Second
>
> > Amendmend
>
> > for what it was designed for?
>
> > Just to be clear: I am not, have not ever, and have no
> plans
>
> > to
>
> > ever
>
> > advocate violence against the state. I consider it
>
> > unnecessary. I
>
> > believe that Dr. King and Gandhi have showed that
> violence
>
> > is
>
> > not
>
> > needed to fight the state. I consider it unlikely to
> work.
>
> > As
>
> > long
>
> > as
>
> > the state keeps duping young men and women to join its
>
> > enforcement
>
> > arm,
>
> > I can't imagine any violent revolution lasting more than
> a
>
> > few
>
> > minutes.
>
> > As someone who trained for many years in the martial
> arts, I
>
> > also
>
> > consider it against my personal principles to use a
> greater
>
> > response
>
> > than what is needed. I believe in the doctrine of
> minimal
>
> > force,
>
> > which
>
> > is why I work within the LP, not within a citizen
> militia.
>
> > But is using a gun to defend yourself against state
> violence
>
> > immoral?
>
> > God no. And violence certainly includes any violation
> done
>
> > under
>
> > threat
>
> > of violence.
>
> > Respectfully,
>
> > Arvin Vohra
>
> > Vice Chair
>
> > Libertarian Party
>
> > On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Jeff Hewitt
>
> >
>
> > <[2][4][7][8][7]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org>
>
> >
>
> > wrote:
>
> > I vote Yes. Jeff Hewitt Region 4 Representative
>
> > On 2018-04-03 05:07, Sam Goldstein wrote:
>
> > Yes
>
> > ---
>
> > Sam Goldstein
>
> > Libertarian National Committee
>
> > [3]317-850-0726 Cell
>
> > On 2018-04-03 02:16, Alicia Mattson wrote:
>
> > We have an electronic mail ballot.
>
> > Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by April 12,
>
> > 2018
>
> > at
>
> > 11:59:59pm
>
> > Pacific time.
>
> > Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Van Horn, Katz, Hayes,
> Goldstein,
>
> > Redpath,
>
> > Hewitt, O'Donnell
>
> > Motion:
>
> > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party holds the
> non-initiation
>
> > of
>
> > force
>
> > as its
>
> > cardinal principle and requires each of its members
>
> > certify
>
> > that
>
> > they
>
> > neither advocate or believe in violent means to
> achieve
>
> > political
>
> > or
>
> > social goals.
>
> > RESOLVED, that the Libertarian National Committee
>
> > suspends
>
> > Arvin
>
> > Vohra
>
> > from his position of Vice-Chair for sustained and
>
> > repeated
>
> > unacceptable
>
> > conduct that brings the principles of the
> Libertarian
>
> > Party
>
> > into
>
> > disrepute, including making and defending a
> statement
>
> > advocating
>
> > lethal
>
> > violence against state employees who are not
> directly
>
> > threatening
>
> > imminent physical harm. Such action is in violation
> of
>
> > our
>
> > membership
>
> > pledge. These actions further endanger the survival
> of
>
> > our
>
> > movement and
>
> > the security of all of our members without their
>
> > consent.
>
> > -Alicia
>
> > --
>
> > Arvin Vohra
>
> >
>
> > [4][5][8][9][8]www.VoteVohra.com
>
> > [5][6][9][10][9]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > (301) 320-3634
>
> > References
>
> > 1. [2][7][10][11][10]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 2. [3][11]mailto:[8][11][12]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 3. [12]tel:317-850-0726
>
> > 4. [4][9][12][13][13]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 5. [5][14]mailto:[10][13][14]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > References
>
> > 1. [15]mailto:[11][14][15]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 2. [12][15][16][16]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 3. [17]mailto:[13][16][17]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 4. [14][17][18][18]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 5. [19]mailto:[15][18][19]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > --
>
> > --
>
> > In Liberty,
>
> > Caryn Ann Harlos
>
> > Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> > (Alaska,
>
> > Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>
> > Washington)
>
> > - [16]Caryn.Ann. [2][20]Harlos at LP.org
>
> > Communications Director, [17]Libertarian Party of Colorado
>
> > 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
>
> > References
>
> > 1. [21]mailto:[19][20]starchild at lp.org
>
> > 2. [22]mailto:[20][21]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 3. [21][22][23]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 4. [24]mailto:[22][23]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 5. [23][24][25]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 6. [26]mailto:[24][25]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 7. [25][26][27]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 8. [28]mailto:[26][27]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 9. [27][28][29]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 10. [30]mailto:[28][29]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 11. [31]mailto:[29][30]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 12. [30][31][32]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 13. [33]mailto:[31][32]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 14. [32][33][34]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 15. [35]mailto:[33][34]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 16. [36]mailto:[34]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 17. [35][35][37]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > --
>
> > --
>
> > In Liberty,
>
> > Caryn Ann Harlos
>
> > Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
> > (Alaska,
>
> > Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>
> > Washington)
>
> > - [36]Caryn.Ann. [3][38]Harlos at LP.org
>
> > Communications Director, [37]Libertarian Party of Colorado
>
> > 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
>
> > References
>
> > 1.
> [4][36][39]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#
>
> > cite_note-2
>
> > 2. [5][40]mailto:[37]starchild at lp.org
>
> > 3. [6][41]mailto:[38]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 4. [7][42]mailto:[39]starchild at lp.org
>
> > 5. [8][43]mailto:[40]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 6. [9][41][44]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 7. [10][45]mailto:[42]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 8. [11][43][46]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 9. [12][47]mailto:[44]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 10. [13][45][48]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 11. [14][49]mailto:[46]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 12. [15][47][50]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 13. [16][51]mailto:[48]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 14. [17][52]mailto:[49]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 15. [18][50][53]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 16. [19][54]mailto:[51]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 17. [20][52][55]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 18. [21][56]mailto:[53]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 19. [22][57]mailto:[54]starchild at lp.org
>
> > 20. [23][58]mailto:[55]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 21. [24][56][59]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 22. [25][60]mailto:[57]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 23. [26][58][61]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 24. [27][62]mailto:[59]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 25. [28][60][63]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 26. [29][64]mailto:[61]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 27. [30][62][65]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 28. [31][66]mailto:[63]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 29. [32][67]mailto:[64]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 30. [33][65][68]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 31. [34][69]mailto:[66]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 32. [35][67][70]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 33. [36][71]mailto:[68]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 34. [37][72]mailto:[69]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 35. [38][70][73]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > 36. [39][74]mailto:[71]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 37. [40][72][75]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > References
>
> > 1. [76]mailto:[73]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 2. [77]mailto:[74]Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 3. [78]mailto:[75]Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 4. [76][79]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
>
> > Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
>
> > 5. [80]mailto:[77]starchild at lp.org
>
> > 6. [81]mailto:[78]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 7. [82]mailto:[79]starchild at lp.org
>
> > 8. [83]mailto:[80]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 9. [81][84]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 10. [85]mailto:[82]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 11. [83][86]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 12. [87]mailto:[84]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 13. [85][88]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 14. [89]mailto:[86]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 15. [87][90]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 16. [91]mailto:[88]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 17. [92]mailto:[89]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 18. [90][93]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 19. [94]mailto:[91]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 20. [92][95]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 21. [96]mailto:[93]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 22. [97]mailto:[94]starchild at lp.org
>
> > 23. [98]mailto:[95]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 24. [96][99]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 25. [100]mailto:[97]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 26. [98][101]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 27. [102]mailto:[99]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 28. [100][103]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 29. [104]mailto:[101]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 30. [102][105]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 31. [106]mailto:[103]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 32. [107]mailto:[104]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 33. [105][108]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 34. [109]mailto:[106]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 35. [107][110]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 36. [111]mailto:[108]VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 37. [112]mailto:[109]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 38. [110][113]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > 39. [114]mailto:[111]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 40. [112][115]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> >
>
> > --
>
> > --
>
> > In Liberty,
>
> > Caryn Ann Harlos
>
> > Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>
> > Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
> Washington)
>
> > - [113]Caryn.Ann. [116]Harlos at LP.org
>
> > Communications Director, [114]Libertarian Party of Colorado
>
> > 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
>
> >
>
> > References
>
> >
>
> > 1. [117]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 2. [118]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 3. [119]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 4. [120]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 5. [121]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 6. [122]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 7. [123]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 8. [124]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 9. [125]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 10. [126]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 11. [127]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 12. [128]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 13. [129]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 14. [130]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 15. [131]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 16. [132]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 17. [133]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 18. [134]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 19. [135]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 20. [136]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 21. [137]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 22. [138]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 23. [139]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 24. [140]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 25. [141]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 26. [142]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 27. [143]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 28. [144]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 29. [145]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 30. [146]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 31. [147]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 32. [148]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 33. [149]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 34. [150]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 35. [151]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > 36. [152]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
>
> > 37. [153]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 38. [154]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 39. [155]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 40. [156]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 41. [157]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 42. [158]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 43. [159]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 44. [160]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 45. [161]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 46. [162]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 47. [163]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 48. [164]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 49. [165]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 50. [166]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 51. [167]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 52. [168]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 53. [169]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 54. [170]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 55. [171]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 56. [172]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 57. [173]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 58. [174]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 59. [175]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 60. [176]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 61. [177]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 62. [178]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 63. [179]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 64. [180]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 65. [181]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 66. [182]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 67. [183]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 68. [184]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 69. [185]mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 70. [186]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > 71. [187]mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 72. [188]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > 73. [189]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 74. [190]mailto:Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 75. [191]mailto:Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 76. [192]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
>
> > 77. [193]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 78. [194]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 79. [195]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 80. [196]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 81. [197]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 82. [198]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 83. [199]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 84. [200]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 85. [201]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 86. [202]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 87. [203]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 88. [204]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 89. [205]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 90. [206]http://mewe.com/
>
> > 91. [207]mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 92. [208]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 93. [209]mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 94. [210]mailto:starchild at lp.org
>
> > 95. [211]mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 96. http://mewe.com/
>
> > 97. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 98. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 99. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 100. http://mewe.com/
>
> > 101. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 102. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 103. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 104. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> > 105. http://mewe.com/
>
> > 106. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
>
> > 107. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
>
> > 108. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
>
> > 109. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 110. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > 111. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 112. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> > 113. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> > 114. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 2. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 3. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 4. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 5. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 6. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 7. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 8. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 9. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 10. http://mewe.com/
> 11. mailto:[8][11][12]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 12. tel:317-850-0726
> 13. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 14. mailto:[10][13][14]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 15. mailto:[11][14][15]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 16. http://mewe.com/
> 17. mailto:[13][16][17]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 18. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 19. mailto:[15][18][19]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 20. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
> 21. mailto:[19][20]starchild at lp.org
> 22. mailto:[20][21]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 23. http://mewe.com/
> 24. mailto:[22][23]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 25. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 26. mailto:[24][25]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 27. http://mewe.com/
> 28. mailto:[26][27]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 29. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 30. mailto:[28][29]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 31. mailto:[29][30]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 32. http://mewe.com/
> 33. mailto:[31][32]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 34. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 35. mailto:[33][34]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 36. mailto:[34]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 37. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 38. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
> 39. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge
> 40. mailto:[37]starchild at lp.org
> 41. mailto:[38]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 42. mailto:[39]starchild at lp.org
> 43. mailto:[40]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 44. http://mewe.com/
> 45. mailto:[42]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 46. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 47. mailto:[44]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 48. http://mewe.com/
> 49. mailto:[46]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 50. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 51. mailto:[48]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 52. mailto:[49]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 53. http://mewe.com/
> 54. mailto:[51]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 55. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 56. mailto:[53]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 57. mailto:[54]starchild at lp.org
> 58. mailto:[55]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 59. http://mewe.com/
> 60. mailto:[57]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 61. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 62. mailto:[59]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 63. http://mewe.com/
> 64. mailto:[61]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 65. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 66. mailto:[63]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 67. mailto:[64]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 68. http://mewe.com/
> 69. mailto:[66]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 70. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 71. mailto:[68]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 72. mailto:[69]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 73. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 74. mailto:[71]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 75. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 76. mailto:[73]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 77. mailto:[74]Harlos at LP.org
> 78. mailto:[75]Harlos at LP.org
> 79. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
> 80. mailto:[77]starchild at lp.org
> 81. mailto:[78]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 82. mailto:[79]starchild at lp.org
> 83. mailto:[80]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 84. http://mewe.com/
> 85. mailto:[82]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 86. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 87. mailto:[84]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 88. http://mewe.com/
> 89. mailto:[86]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 90. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 91. mailto:[88]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 92. mailto:[89]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 93. http://mewe.com/
> 94. mailto:[91]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 95. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 96. mailto:[93]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 97. mailto:[94]starchild at lp.org
> 98. mailto:[95]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 99. http://mewe.com/
> 100. mailto:[97]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 101. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 102. mailto:[99]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 103. http://mewe.com/
> 104. mailto:[101]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 105. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 106. mailto:[103]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 107. mailto:[104]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 108. http://mewe.com/
> 109. mailto:[106]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 110. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 111. mailto:[108]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 112. mailto:[109]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 113. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 114. mailto:[111]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 115. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 116. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
> 117. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 118. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 119. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 120. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 121. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 122. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 123. http://mewe.com/
> 124. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 125. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 126. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 127. http://mewe.com/
> 128. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 129. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 130. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 131. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 132. http://mewe.com/
> 133. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 134. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 135. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 136. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 137. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 138. http://mewe.com/
> 139. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 140. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 141. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 142. http://mewe.com/
> 143. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 144. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 145. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 146. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 147. http://mewe.com/
> 148. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 149. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 150. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 151. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 152. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
> 153. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 154. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 155. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 156. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 157. http://mewe.com/
> 158. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 159. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 160. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 161. http://mewe.com/
> 162. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 163. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 164. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 165. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 166. http://mewe.com/
> 167. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 168. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 169. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 170. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 171. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 172. http://mewe.com/
> 173. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 174. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 175. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 176. http://mewe.com/
> 177. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 178. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 179. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 180. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 181. http://mewe.com/
> 182. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 183. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 184. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 185. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 186. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 187. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 188. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 189. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 190. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
> 191. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
> 192. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
> 193. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 194. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 195. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 196. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 197. http://mewe.com/
> 198. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 199. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 200. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 201. http://mewe.com/
> 202. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 203. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 204. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 205. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
> 206. http://mewe.com/
> 207. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 208. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 209. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 210. mailto:starchild at lp.org
> 211. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
>
--
--
*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/>
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*
-------------- next part --------------
**raises hand**
I don't know what debate you are in but it doesn't appear to be this
one.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 8:11 AM, <[1]david.demarest at lp.org> wrote:
The Libertarian Party was born from the radical ideas introduced
by Ayn
Rand. She was not a Libertarian and did not like Libertarians,
perhaps
because she thought they were stealing her ideas and
misinterpreting
them. And interpret them, they did. Rand absolutely nailed the
moral
justification for reason, rational self-interest, and laissez
faire
capitalism. Rand was a Minarchist and perhaps a mild chauvinist.
She
suggested that top-down leaders should be men, not women. The
radicals
that created the LP built the party and Statement of Principles
by
taking Rand's admirable intellectual process a step further. They
had
the temerity and courage to examine the moral justification for
government, or lack thereof. Make no mistake, the LP was born of
radical, controversial ideas expressed with passion that grew the
movement exponentially based largely on Rand's ideas that filled
the
intellectual vacuum that existed prior to the release of ‘Atlas
Shrugged’.
As many intellectual movements do, at least at the top-down
political
level, the Libertarian Party gradually moved away from its
radical
roots, ostensibly to avoid scaring off voters. Then along came
Dr. Ron
Paul. His radical interpretation of what was wrong with
government and
specific remedies reinvigorated the LP and generated a huge
following,
especially among the young. Many Libertarians, both radicals and
moderates, that were inspired by both Ayn Rand and Dr. Ron Paul,
disagree with specific points in Rand’s and Dr. Paul’s
Libertarian
world views, particularly on the issue of Minarchism versus
Voluntaryism.
Our specific ideological disagreements, however, cannot obscure
the
fact that radical, controversial ideas, expressed passionately by
inspirational leaders, such and Rand and Dr. Paul, were and will
continue to be the driving force that sustains the broader
Libertarian
movement. The question is whether the political arm of the
movement,
the Libertarian Party, will follow suit, inspire others with our
intellectual courage, and lead by example with new and
controversial
ideas. Or will we apologize to voters for our principles and
gradually
drift toward the fate of the old parties that blatantly appease
voters
to win hollow political victories really aimed at gaining
authority
over others.
Who among us will have the intellectual foresight, creativity,
courage,
and passion necessary to introduce new and controversial ideas
that
will inspire non-Libertarians to vote for Libertarian candidates,
win
meaningful elections at all levels to obtain regulatory relief,
and
upsize the voluntary market sector while downsizing the coercive
statist sector? Who among us will be the next Ayn Rand or Dr. Ron
Paul
to reinvigorate and re-radicalize the Libertarian Party in our
quest
for freedom, nothing more, nothing less, for all people?
-----Original Message-----
From: Lnc-business <[2]lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org> On Behalf
Of
Starchild
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2018 5:55 AM
To: [3]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-05: Suspension of
Arvin
Vohra
Caryn Ann,
No worries about not being able to take my call, I
know
you do an incredible amount of work for the party and certainly
don't
begrudge you your family time. And I appreciate your kind words
about
my creativity and writing ability. I think the latter can be rather
hit-or-miss – I don't always feel particularly articulate, and
sometimes I can just be lazy or sloppy. Your essay below is very
well
written by the way, even though the tone is informal.
I'm not aware of ContraPoints, although I do consume
a
wide variety of media from different viewpoints both left and right
as
well as libertarian, as I agree it's good to be familiar with the
arguments for their respective brands of statism. Will try to check
that out.
I can look at pages on the "F" site now, if someone
sends me a link, I just can't post there without an account. Aside
from
my desire not to contribute to the problem of society entrusting
certain companies with too much power, the problem with creating a
dummy account on that site in order to see what Libertarians are
saying
there is that people would naturally want to know who I am before
friending me, and that process of getting into everybody's friend
networks to see the conversations would naturally take some time.
Meanwhile, as it became commonly known among members of our
community
that Account X was me under a different name, it seems inevitable
that
someone not wanting my voice there for whatever reason(s) would
anonymously report me and get it shut down.
> ==I'm aware that the pledge wasn't designed as a litmus test.==
> Then you conceded my point.
You seem to be under the impression that I was
trying
to say it was designed as a litmus test. That's not what I was
trying
to say. I was recognizing that it IS a kind of litmus test, but that
we
could use a better one.
> He has walked back statements and apologized for bad
implications.
That is the charitable reading. Or you are saying he passive
aggressively just said I am sorry you are such crybabies.
I think there's a difference between walking back
specific phrasing that caused offense, and disavowing the underlying
message that readers would naturally get from a post, which I'm not
aware of him doing until now.
But to get to the heart of this. While there are
various individual points of your argument with which I am in
agreement, the overall caricature you paint of Arvin just doesn't
square with the observations of my own senses – the talk of "mind
games", "gaslighting", "bad actors", "trolls", "edgelords" (this
sounds
like something out of a sci-fi novel!), posts that "ooze with glee",
"enjoy(ing) what (he) put(s) others through", etc. – none of this
accords with my personal sense of the individual I've come to know
during two terms on the LNC.
I'm not saying YOU are trying to "gaslight" us; I
don't
doubt your sincerity. But take a step back and think about the kind
of
person that Arvin would have to be, in order for all the stuff
you're
saying about him to be true, and (for everyone) ask yourselves
whether
that's really the same person we've known on this committee.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
[1][4]RealReform at earthlink.net
(415) 625-FREE
@StarchildSF
On Apr 4, 2018, at 12:12 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
> Starchild, we are not going to change each other's minds. I
could
not
> take your calls as I was recording live for the LP. Also
honestly,
I
> am not sacrificing any more family time for Arvin. Any time I
do
will
> be getting on the phone with members who now think the LP is not
for
> them - that non-edgelords need not apply. Yes, I get those
calls.
> ==Not sure what you mean by "I know how our members are".
...When
you
> refer to
> "the world of social media", which other sites are you
talking
> about?==
> How members are taking it. On Facebeast.
> == Again it sounds like you are referring to some post or
posts
other
> than
> what you sent me, which mentioned only school boards, not
parents.==
> Starchild at this point it is incumbent on you to get a dummy
account
> and research and see for yourself.
> ==The motion does more than "cite" the censure, it repeats the
language
> given then as justification for censure, and now uses that
language
> as
> justification for suspension (which was previously
rejected).===
> That is what citing is. And it was rejected as not enough THEN,
so
> censure, in which the next step is removal. That is the
progression
of
> professional discipline.
> ==The only
> thing I'm aware of that's changed since then is Arvin made
one
> ill-advised post which he said was a joke in poor taste and
he
has
> disavowed (out of god knows how many other things he's posted
during
> the intervening weeks).===
> First Starchild, I think you may be aware of the YouTuber
> ContraPoints. Excellent liberal commentator for people to get
out
of
> the Milo echo chamber and hear good liberal defenses. I don't
agree
> with her, but I respect her immensely. She talks about the
difficulty
> of dealing with ethno nationalists - who say all the fashy
things
but
> then deny it. There comes a point where it is a body of
evidence.
The
> analogy here is to how gaslighting works NOT any idea that
anyone
here
> is fashy (OBVIOUSLY NO ONE HERE IS) - just showing how these
things
> work and how Libertarians are often hoodwinked. I can send you
the
> link to her video - it is fantastic, and I think you would love
her
as
> a person. She reminds me of you with her creative genius. Back
to
> Arvin, It was more than ill-advised, it was inexcusable for a
leader of
> the LP. Just like it would be inexcusable for a leader of the
ADL
to
> make a "get into the ovens" "joke." Apologies and alleged
disavowing
> (many many people do not believe it because again, he goes on to
talk
> about WHEN it is acceptable in the same sentence - taking away
any
> genuineness or utility of any disavowal and is why I don't buy
his
> later disavowal either - I just don't. I'm a wise old bird when
it
> comes to these mind games) do not make everything okay. This is
> repeated behaviour and it is enough. I was once in an abusive
> marriage. Yes he apologized. Many times. But there came a
time
when
> it was enough. And my ex genuinely wanted to do better (or
convinced
> me he did) - Arvin has promised us he will be worse. His words
ring
> hollow particularly when coupled with a call to defend taking up
arms
> and lethal force.
> ==Which statements has Arvin retracted in the past? I think he's
> apologized for upsetting people with other posts, but that he
stood
> by
> the basic positions taken therein.===
> He has walked back statements and apologized for bad
implications.
> That is the charitable reading. Or you are saying he passive
> aggressively just said I am sorry you are such crybabies. He is
> standing by this basic position too - it is not very utilitarian
to
> shoot up school boards and to HIM it may not be proportional -
but
you
> know, they are the enemy and their collaborators. You simply
have
to
> read carefully. Its in the very post here - why do you think
two
> people changed to YES - AFTER reading his "defense." Because it
read
> like a fertilizer bomb. Our words have impact. I watched some
> specials on what drove McVeigh to his horrific act - mixing bad
> government with reckless rhetoric and a healthy dose of
nuttiness
and a
> big kaboom comes out. Free speech is not consequenceless
speech.
That
> girl who goaded her male friend over text to just kill himself
and
he
> did - she didn't kill him. He still had agency. It is a danger
of
> free speech, but it doesn't make her speech noble or good. Our
words -
> as leaders - have influence. We took these positions knowing
that.
> Libertarians believe in responsibility. Part of that
responsibility is
> that you don't as a leader in the third largest political party
in
the
> US in a politically violent time, OVER THE BODIES OF DEAD TEENS,
"joke"
> about murdering school board officials - when we run school
board
> officials!!! By Arvin's logic, we are enemy collaborators.
Many
> anarchists of his POV think so. This anarchist does not.
> ==I'm aware that the pledge wasn't designed as a litmus test.==
> Then you conceded my point. It was put in place as a barrier, a
> protection, to OUR MEMBERS. Which our Vice Chair blithely
"joked
> away." Not acceptable. Not okay. And another note ends up in
many
> members files due to Arvin. Its all fun and games until shit
gets
> real. He either was so obtuse and tone deaf to make such an
> inappropriate "joke" (coupled with his past inappropriate
comments
> about preferring that little girls get impregnated by much older
men
> with jobs rather than an equally confused kid) OR he meant it.
OR
> potentially a combination of both. "Jokes" are often "funny" to
the
> people who make them because there is some small grain of truth
in
them
> to the maker and to the audience. We laugh at inappropriate
> stereotypes because there ARE some people like that (the problem
is
> making a whole GROUP like that and making neutral
characteristics
to be
> malignant or bad when it is just people being people). To wit,
there
> are a lot of radical leftist feminists with pink hair. I am not
one of
> them. But people laugh when that joke is made towards me. It is
funny
> because here is some truth. And then I get an opportunity to
show
how
> stupid collectivization is. What kernel of truth did Arvin find
SO
> FUNNY? That he juxtaposed it with the murder of children!?:!
As a
> political leader????? There are people who make "rape jokes."
I
> question what in the person exists for them to even consider
that a
> "joke" unless it was to show some underlying truth through dark
evil.
> What underlying truth is there in this? Not to mention that
THIS
IS A
> PATTERN. Arvin has had for months - quite seriously - made
posts
that
> follow the pattern of Bad Idea: XXXX, Good Idea: XXXXX or more
> frequently Bad Idea XXXX, Worse Idea XXXXX. So he then goes and
says
> Bad Idea school shootings. Good Idea School Board Shootings,
and
no
> everyone is supposed to magically know that THIS one was not
serious.
> That he broke character. (it also troubles me that he admits he
> wouldn't say that on FB but WeMe (or whatever silly name it is)
is
> edgier so its all okay..... so perhaps helicopter ride jokes
are
also
> okay, you just gotta be down with the Hoppe dudes to make them).
> Why do we find it so ironic when the fundamentalist theocrat who
rails
> against gay people is found in bed with another of the same sex.
Not
> because we think he should not have the right or any moral
judgment
> about the intimate act. We rightly note the hypocrisy of a
person
who
> is part of a movement that condemns others for such things doing
such
> things. We are a movement built on PEACE and non-initiation of
force.
> To have one of our leaders make a joke out of our cardinal
principle
> tickles the same sense of wrongness. Mother Theresa could get
away
> with a nun joke. She couldn't get away with a joke about
starving
> Indian children, even if she apologized. That is not thought
police.
> That is not unLibertarian. It is sheer meritocracy.
> There are no words I can explain this better with Starchild.
You
are
> brilliant and can out-write me on any day of the week and twice
on
> Sunday. But you are off base here, and I think lost in a
Libertopia
> where there are not bad actors and trolls and destructive
edgelords
> that act that way because they enjoy what they put others
through.
Our
> failure to see and deal with is evidence that dangerous
sociopaths
(NO,
> that is not what I am saying is going on here) would have a
field
day
> in "our world" because we would buy their silver-tongued
> "explanations." We have got the gentle as doves part down pat.
We
> need to brush up on the wise as serpents part.
> I'm done. I have spilled my ration of digital ink.
> What is even worse about what Arvin has done - and his posts
over
it
> ooze with glee - he is fracturing us with all the zeal of the
High
> Septon -- the Party will not be pure until she is stripped and
paraded
> through the streets in atonement for our sins of a ticket that
didn't
> always stick to libertarian principles. That isn't what he was
elected
> to do. He did have recourse as Vice Chair - he could have moved
to
> disqualify them. He did not. He can resign and not have the
weight of
> this responsibility if he wishes. Life involves choices, and we
chose
> these roles and responsibilities.
> This is a cumulative case of which the "lets murder the school
board"
> "joke" is just the latest. He was censured. That is a
probationary
> warning. He didn't take heed and picked the one thing that holds
us
> together - the membership pledge of non-aggression - as the butt
of
his
> "joke" built on the youthful victims who woke up that day
wondering
> about how much homework they would have or if their crush was
still
mad
> at them - not contemplating that those same bodies carefully
dressed
> and ready would within hours be cold and dead and the only
clothing
> that would matter would be the attire they would be buried in.
> Let me play the Septa for a moment and say.... "shame."
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 11:39 PM, Starchild
<[1][2][5]starchild at lp.org>
wrote:
>
> Caryn Ann,
> My further responses interspersed below...
> On Apr 3, 2018, at 6:03 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
> ==When you say "He defended the morality of violence
against
> all
> 'enemy
> collaborators' such as teachers and school boards", I
don't
> know to
> which statement(s) you are referring, so I don't know if
I'd
> interpret
> them as you apparently are.==
> I know how our members are. Yes you are absent from the
world
> of
> social media - where the damage is happening. He is
opposed
to
> violence against the state because it doesn't work but
goads
> people
> to
> follow the trail of when it is moral to use guns against
these
> people
> Not sure what you mean by "I know how our members are". I
don't
> use the
> social media site that starts with an "F", but I'm on
Twitter,
> numerous
> email lists (including the Radical Caucus list, which it
would
be
> cool
> if the caucus actually used!). I just joined MeWe. When you
refer
> to
> "the world of social media", which other sites are you
talking
> about?
> --- my example of the joking abortion clinic bomber is
apt -
> language
> means something and has consequences.
> == I also defend the MORALITY* of violence in self
defense
or
> defense
> of others (as long as it's proportionate) as I think
> non-pacifist
> libertarians generally do; that doesn't mean I think it's
> necessarily
> a
> good idea, or the path I want to follow.==
> I do too. That was never the point. You are not doing
it
in
> the
> context of a school shooting, venomous rhetoric against
> teachers AND
> parents, and then claiming it was a "joke" and goading
people
> to
> consider just when they might pick up a gun against these
> people.
> Again it sounds like you are referring to some post or
posts
> other than
> what you sent me, which mentioned only school boards, not
> parents.
> ==The fact of Arvin having already been censured (and
having
> already
> faced removal) using the same language is a good reason
not
to
> rely
> on
> that language referring to previous actions now. Seems a
lot
> like
> double jeopardy.===
> It is perfectly a good reason since censure is meant as a
> WARNING,
> and
> citing the warning when taking the next step is how
reality
> works.
> The motion does more than "cite" the censure, it repeats
the
> language
> given then as justification for censure, and now uses that
> language as
> justification for suspension (which was previously
rejected).
The
> only
> thing I'm aware of that's changed since then is Arvin made
one
> ill-advised post which he said was a joke in poor taste and
he
> has
> disavowed (out of god knows how many other things he's
posted
> during
> the intervening weeks).
> ==And as I've said, I DON'T think his post was
acceptable.
If
> he
> hadn't
> retracted it, I would have joined in asking him to
resign,
and
> if he
> didn't, possibly supported an APPROPRIATELY-WORDED motion
for
> suspension.==
> Funny that, he keeps making horrid statements and
"retracting"
> them.
> And promising more. I think you are being gullible
beyond
> belief and
> excusing the inexcusable.
> Which statements has Arvin retracted in the past? I think
he's
> apologized for upsetting people with other posts, but that
he
> stood by
> the basic positions taken therein. That's different than
what
> he's
> saying in this case � here's what he just posted on MeWe:
> "Today, I�m being accused of advocating violence.
Frankly,
> that�s false. Like many of you, I have said that the
Second
> Amendment
> is for defending yourself against government. I�ve also,
> repeatedly
> pointed out that a violent revolution is neither necessary
nor
> likely
> to work. I�ve advocated against violence, even morally
> justified
> violence, repeatedly. I�ve even advocated against
�legal�
> violence done
> by the state, and encouraged young men and women to find
> nonviolent
> work, rather than join the military.
> I don�t advocate violence. I don�t support it. I
don�t
> support �legal�
> violence done by the state. I don�t support morally
justified
> violence
> against the state. I oppose violence in every form.
> Did I make a joke about violence? Yes. Did I also apologize
and
> clarify
> my position a few hours later? Yes. Did I emphasize my
opposition
> to
> violence? Yes.
> I�ve been very clear about my positions. I know many of
you
> don�t agree
> with them, but I haven�t said �Haha, just kidding,�
because
> I was never
> kidding. Military service is immoral, because U.S. foreign
policy
> is
> immoral. Government school involvement is immoral, because
theft
> is immoral. Age of consent laws, which have the state usurp
> natural
> rights that stem from self ownership as well as family
rights,
> are
> also immoral. I continue to stand by each of those
positions.
> But I�m not standing by a joke taken literally, because
it
is a
> joke taken literally. A joke in poor taste, as I�ve
clearly
> stated, but
> a joke nonetheless."
> ===I know why the non-aggression pledge exists, and am a
strong
> supporter of it. In fact I think it should probably be
> strengthened
> (require members to meet a stronger litmus test, such as
> scoring some
> minimum on the Nolan Chart, in order to hold leadership
> positions in
> the party).==
> I suspect you don't, since it was never a LITMUS test to
begin
> with
> no
> matter how much we would like it to be so.
> From David Nolan, Interestingly, most people in the LP do
not
> know
> why
> it was originally placed on membership applications. We
did
it
> not
> because we believed that we could keep out "bad" people
by
> asking
> them
> to sign--after all, evil people will lie to achieve their
> ends--but
> to
> provide some evidence that the LP was not a group
advocating
> violent
> overthrow of the gov't. In the early 70's, memories of
Nixon's
> "enemies
> list" and the McCarthy hearings of the 50's were still
fresh
in
> people's minds, and we wanted to protect ourselves from
future
> witch-hunts.^[1][2]
> I'm aware that the pledge wasn't designed as a litmus test.
It's
> better
> than nothing, but the language leaves much room for
> interpretation.
> Which is why I think it would be helpful to have something
more
> specific, like asking people's positions on a sampling of
civil
> liberties, economic freedom, and war/peace/nationalism
questions.
> Love & Liberty,
> ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
[1][2][3][6]RealReform at earthlink.net
> (415) 625-FREE
> @StarchildSF
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 6:37 PM, Starchild
> <[2][3][4][7]starchild at lp.org>
>
> wrote:
> Caryn Ann,
> When you say "He defended the morality of
violence
> against
> all 'enemy collaborators' such as teachers and school
boards", I
> don't know to which statement(s) you are referring, so I
don't
> know
> if I'd interpret them as you apparently are.
> I also defend the MORALITY* of violence in self
defense
> or
> defense of others (as long as it's proportionate) as I
think
> non-pacifist libertarians generally do; that doesn't mean
I
> think
> it's necessarily a good idea, or the path I want to
follow.
> "Given that this body already censured him using that same
> language..."
> The fact of Arvin having already been censured
(and
> having
> already faced removal) using the same language is a good
reason
> not
> to rely on that language referring to previous actions
now.
> Seems a
> lot like double jeopardy.
> And as I've said, I DON'T think his post was
acceptable.
> If
> he hadn't retracted it, I would have joined in asking him
to
> resign,
> and if he didn't, possibly supported an
APPROPRIATELY-WORDED
> motion
> for suspension.
> I know why the non-aggression pledge exists, and
am
a
> strong
> supporter of it. In fact I think it should probably be
> strengthened
> (require members to meet a stronger litmus test, such as
scoring
> some minimum on the Nolan Chart, in order to hold
leadership
> positions in the party).
> Love & Liberty,
> ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
>
[3][4][5][8]RealReform at earthlink.net
>
> (415) 625-FREE
> @StarchildSF
> *Apologies for the use of CAPS for emphasis, but italics
and
> boldface still don't work on this list since our switch
to
new
> email
> servers.
> On Apr 3, 2018, at 3:31 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
> Starchild--
> ==I've seen no convincing argument that anything else
> you've posted has been in violation of the
Non-Aggression
> Principle,===
> Because you fall into the trap of the game of saying
something
> different later. He defended the morality of violence
against
> all
> "enemy collaborators" such as teachers and school boards.
> == yet the "Whereas" clause citing that principle as a
preamble
> to
> accusing you of "sustained and repeated unacceptable
conduct
> that
> brings the principles of the Libertarian Party into
disrepute"
> appears
> to take it as a given==
> Given that this body already censured him using that same
> language,
> it
> IS a given.
> ==And does anyone really believe that an
> ill-advised social media posting which has been
disavowed
is
> enough
> to
> "endanger the survival" [emphasis added] of the LP, let
alone
> the
> entire freedom movement? This is gross exaggeration.==
> I do. The Party founders did. Your statements are in
ignorance
> of
> the
> history of WHY we have that pledge to begin with.
> == What is perhaps most troubling is the lack of
acknowledgment
> that
> routinely failing to take strongly libertarian
positions
poses
> a
> far
> greater risk to the party, the movement, and the
security
of
> party
> members and members of society alike from State
violence,
than
> does
> someone occasionally going too far.==
> I don't have a scale of what harms more, but talking about
an
> exaggeration, I routinely rail against failure to take
strongly
> libertarian positions. This is not an either/or.
> But your vote is your vote - you think a wink/wink joke
about
> violence
> in the whole context of his rhetoric is acceptable. Let's
say a
> pro-lifers routinely called doctors murderers and
accessories
to
> murder
> (or let's say - enemy collaborators) and then "joked"
about
> bombing
> an
> abortion clinic --- how would that fly? Like a lead
zeppelin.
> Just
> like this does.
> Once again we prove that freedom must mean that bullies
get
to
> walk
> all
> over people, conduct outrageous acts, and there is no will
to
> disassociate. The LNC is the biggest proof that voluntary
> government
> will not protect the vulnerable - we can't even take care
of
our
> own
> problems.
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Starchild
> <[1][4][5][6][9]starchild at lp.org>
>
> wrote:
> Arvin,
> As I wrote in a previous message here, my reading of
your
> social
> media
> post is that it was over the line, and unlike any of
your
> previous
> posts, actually did appear to advocate for the
initiation of
> force.
> Since the post at that time had apparently not been
made
> public,
> and
> was not made in an LP forum, it was my hope that we
would
> not
> risk
> damaging the party's reputation by officially taking
it
up
> here
> and
> thereby making it public and an official party
matter,
but
> rather
> call
> for your resignation as individuals.
> While I don't disagree with you as far as the moral
�
as
> opposed to
> practical � justification for defensive violence
against
> individuals
> who are causing aggression, not all government
personnel
fit
> into
> that
> category. There are Libertarian Party members and
others
> serving
> on
> school boards who are fighting to reduce aggression,
not
> increase
> it,
> and an implicit sanction of indiscriminate violence
against
> such
> a
> broad category of people in government would amount
to a
> willingness to
> sacrifice such individuals as "collateral damage" in
> contravention of
> their individual rights.
> However, you have disavowed and apologized for the
post,
and
> said
> enough here about routinely arguing against the use
of
> violence
> against
> the State and for the use of minimal force and the
> nonviolent
> approach
> advocated by Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi,
to
make
> that
> disavowal credible. If anyone attempts to use this to
attack
> the
> LP,
> now that it has been officially raised in a motion
here,
> they
> will have
> to overcome the fact that this was a personal post by
one LP
> official
> who subsequently retracted it and apologized for his
words
> as
> having
> been a joke in poor taste.
> While I wish you would better think some of these
things
> through
> before
> posting, I don't see a personal post by an LNC member
on
a
> social
> media
> site, not in the name of the party, which the member
has
> clearly
> retracted and apologized for as having been an
inappropriate
> joke, as
> sufficient cause for involuntary removal from office.
Mere
> poor
> judgment in the matter of deciding what to post via
one's
> personal
> social media accounts seems less important to me on
the
> whole
> than poor
> judgment in deciding how to vote on substantive party
> matters,
> and if I
> had to rank each member of the LNC on that basis, you
would
> not
> come
> out at the bottom. I'm also mindful of your apparent
state
> of
> mind,
> which again seems to reflect an excess of healthy
> libertarian
> sentiment
> against the aggression and abuses of the State,
rather
than
> a
> lack of
> it. I accept your retraction and apology.
> From the wording of the motion for suspension, it
appears
> that
> some
> members of this body are again seeking your
involuntary
> removal
> � this
> time without the due process of holding a meeting �
on
> account
> of
> previous posts for which you have already been
censured.
> Furthermore I believe the wording of the motion is
sloppy
> and
> contains
> inaccuracies. I've seen no convincing argument that
anything
> else
> you've posted has been in violation of the
Non-Aggression
> Principle,
> yet the "Whereas" clause citing that principle as a
preamble
> to
> accusing you of "sustained and repeated unacceptable
conduct
> that
> brings the principles of the Libertarian Party into
> disrepute"
> appears
> to take it as a given that you've repeatedly acted in
> contravention of
> this as well as other unnamed principles. It is also
> inaccurate
> to
> speak of you bringing the principles of the
Libertarian
> Party
> into
> disrepute. Bringing a group's adherence to principles
into
> disrepute is
> not the same as bringing the principles themselves
into
> disrepute. The
> principles stand regardless of how often or how
egregiously
> members of
> society violate them. And does anyone really believe
that an
> ill-advised social media posting which has been
disavowed is
> enough to
> "endanger the survival" [emphasis added] of the LP,
let
> alone
> the
> entire freedom movement? This is gross exaggeration.
> What is perhaps most troubling is the lack of
acknowledgment
> that
> routinely failing to take strongly libertarian
positions
> poses
> a
> far
> greater risk to the party, the movement, and the
security of
> party
> members and members of society alike from State
violence,
> than
> does
> someone occasionally going too far.
> I vote no on the motion.
> Love & Liberty,
> ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National
Committee
>
>
[1][2][5][6]RealReform at earthlink.
> net
> (415) 625-FREE
> @StarchildSF
> On Apr 3, 2018, at 7:33 AM, Arvin Vohra wrote:
> Since some were unable to see my video response to
this,
> here is
> something else I posted on mewe on this issue:
> As you may have heard, some on the LNC are once
again
> working to
> suspend me from the LNC, based on an inappropriate
joke I
> made on
> [1][3][6][7][10]mewe.com. The joke was in poor
taste, and
I
> have
>
> already
> apologized
> for it, and clarified my actual position
(specifically,
that
> I
> don't
> advocate for shooting school boards. I would have
considered
> that
> obvious, but sometimes tone gets lost in social
media).
> But it is, I have to say, interesting to see the
cognitive
> dissonance
> that is growing within the Libertarian Party. Every
day,
I
> hear
> taxation is theft. We even have new LP t-shirts that
say
> taxation
> is
> theft (they are a great way to support the LP and
spread
the
> message).
> We agree that taxation is an immoral violation of
your
> sacred
> rights.
> We also have routinely argued that guns are not for
hunting,
> they
> are
> for opposing government overreach. I've spoken
officially on
> this
> issue. I've said this to cheering Libertarian and
> Conservative
> groups,
> to furious progressive groups. I know many of you
have
made
> the
> same
> argument.
> We talk about how wrong it is for the government to
rob
us
> and
> use
> the
> money for immoral actions like the drug war, foreign
wars,
> and
> government schools. A few minutes later, we talk
about
how
> guns
> are
> necessary to block government tyranny and overreach.
> I've routinely argued against any violence against
the
> state,
> since I
> consider it unlikely to work. But for all the
hardcore
gun
> supporters
> who wear taxation is theft t-shirts: what is the
level
of
> tyranny
> that
> would be great enough to morally justify using
violence
in
> self
> defense?
> Is being locked up in a government rape cage for a
> victimless
> crime
> not
> enough moral justification? Is having your son or
daughter
> locked
> up
> in
> such a rape cage not enough justification? Is being
robbed
> to
> have
> your
> money used to bomb people in other countries, in your
name
> not
> enough?
> What level of tyranny would morally justify using the
Second
> Amendmend
> for what it was designed for?
> Just to be clear: I am not, have not ever, and have
no
plans
> to
> ever
> advocate violence against the state. I consider it
> unnecessary. I
> believe that Dr. King and Gandhi have showed that
violence
> is
> not
> needed to fight the state. I consider it unlikely to
work.
> As
> long
> as
> the state keeps duping young men and women to join
its
> enforcement
> arm,
> I can't imagine any violent revolution lasting more
than
a
> few
> minutes.
> As someone who trained for many years in the martial
arts, I
> also
> consider it against my personal principles to use a
greater
> response
> than what is needed. I believe in the doctrine of
minimal
> force,
> which
> is why I work within the LP, not within a citizen
militia.
> But is using a gun to defend yourself against state
violence
> immoral?
> God no. And violence certainly includes any violation
done
> under
> threat
> of violence.
> Respectfully,
> Arvin Vohra
> Vice Chair
> Libertarian Party
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Jeff Hewitt
>
> <[2][4][7][8][7][11]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org>
>
> wrote:
> I vote Yes. Jeff Hewitt Region 4 Representative
> On 2018-04-03 05:07, Sam Goldstein wrote:
> Yes
> ---
> Sam Goldstein
> Libertarian National Committee
> [3]317-850-0726 Cell
> On 2018-04-03 02:16, Alicia Mattson wrote:
> We have an electronic mail ballot.
> Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by April
12,
> 2018
> at
> 11:59:59pm
> Pacific time.
> Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Van Horn, Katz, Hayes,
Goldstein,
> Redpath,
> Hewitt, O'Donnell
> Motion:
> WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party holds the
non-initiation
> of
> force
> as its
> cardinal principle and requires each of its
members
> certify
> that
> they
> neither advocate or believe in violent means to
achieve
> political
> or
> social goals.
> RESOLVED, that the Libertarian National
Committee
> suspends
> Arvin
> Vohra
> from his position of Vice-Chair for sustained
and
> repeated
> unacceptable
> conduct that brings the principles of the
Libertarian
> Party
> into
> disrepute, including making and defending a
statement
> advocating
> lethal
> violence against state employees who are not
directly
> threatening
> imminent physical harm. Such action is in
violation
of
> our
> membership
> pledge. These actions further endanger the
survival
of
> our
> movement and
> the security of all of our members without their
> consent.
> -Alicia
> --
> Arvin Vohra
>
> [4][5][8][9][8][12]www.VoteVohra.com
> [5][6][9][10][9][13]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> (301) 320-3634
> References
> 1. [2][7][10][11][10][14]http://mewe.com/
> 2. [3][11]mailto:[8][11][12][15]jeffr
ey.hewitt at lp.org
> 3. [12]tel:317-850-0726
> 4. [4][9][12][13][13][16]http://www.
VoteVohra.com/
> 5. [5][14]mailto:[10][13][14][17]Vote
Vohra at gmail.com
> References
> 1. [15]mailto:[11][14][15][18]RealRef
orm at earthlink.net
> 2. [12][15][16][16][19]http://mewe.com/
> 3. [17]mailto:[13][16][17][20]jeffrey
.hewitt at lp.org
> 4. [14][17][18][18][21]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 5. [19]mailto:[15][18][19][22]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> --
> --
> In Liberty,
> Caryn Ann Harlos
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National
Committee
> (Alaska,
> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah,
Wyoming,
> Washington)
> - [16]Caryn.Ann. [2][20]Harlos at LP.org
> Communications Director, [17]Libertarian Party of
Colorado
> 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
> References
> 1. [21]mailto:[19][20][23]starchild at lp.org
> 2. [22]mailto:[20][21][24]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 3. [21][22][23][25]http://mewe.com/
> 4. [24]mailto:[22][23][26]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 5. [23][24][25][27]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 6. [26]mailto:[24][25][28]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 7. [25][26][27][29]http://mewe.com/
> 8. [28]mailto:[26][27][30]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 9. [27][28][29][31]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 10. [30]mailto:[28][29][32]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 11. [31]mailto:[29][30][33]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 12. [30][31][32][34]http://mewe.com/
> 13. [33]mailto:[31][32][35]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 14. [32][33][34][36]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 15. [35]mailto:[33][34][37]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 16. [36]mailto:[34]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 17. [35][35][37][38]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> --
> --
> In Liberty,
> Caryn Ann Harlos
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National
Committee
> (Alaska,
> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah,
Wyoming,
> Washington)
> - [36]Caryn.Ann. [3][38]Harlos at LP.org
> Communications Director, [37]Libertarian Party of
Colorado
> 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
> References
> 1.
[4][36][39][39]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#
> cite_note-2
> 2. [5][40]mailto:[37][40]starchild at lp.org
> 3. [6][41]mailto:[38][41]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 4. [7][42]mailto:[39][42]starchild at lp.org
> 5. [8][43]mailto:[40][43]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 6. [9][41][44][44]http://mewe.com/
> 7. [10][45]mailto:[42][45]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 8. [11][43][46][46]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 9. [12][47]mailto:[44][47]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 10. [13][45][48][48]http://mewe.com/
> 11. [14][49]mailto:[46][49]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 12. [15][47][50][50]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 13. [16][51]mailto:[48][51]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 14. [17][52]mailto:[49][52]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 15. [18][50][53][53]http://mewe.com/
> 16. [19][54]mailto:[51][54]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 17. [20][52][55][55]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 18. [21][56]mailto:[53][56]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 19. [22][57]mailto:[54][57]starchild at lp.org
> 20. [23][58]mailto:[55][58]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 21. [24][56][59][59]http://mewe.com/
> 22. [25][60]mailto:[57][60]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 23. [26][58][61][61]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 24. [27][62]mailto:[59][62]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 25. [28][60][63][63]http://mewe.com/
> 26. [29][64]mailto:[61][64]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 27. [30][62][65][65]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 28. [31][66]mailto:[63][66]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 29. [32][67]mailto:[64][67]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 30. [33][65][68][68]http://mewe.com/
> 31. [34][69]mailto:[66][69]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 32. [35][67][70][70]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 33. [36][71]mailto:[68][71]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 34. [37][72]mailto:[69]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 35. [38][70][73][72]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 36. [39][74]mailto:[71]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 37. [40][72][75][73]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> References
> 1. [76]mailto:[73][74]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 2. [77]mailto:[74]Harlos at LP.org
> 3. [78]mailto:[75]Harlos at LP.org
> 4. [76][79][75]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
> Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
> 5. [80]mailto:[77][76]starchild at lp.org
> 6. [81]mailto:[78][77]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 7. [82]mailto:[79][78]starchild at lp.org
> 8. [83]mailto:[80][79]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 9. [81][84][80]http://mewe.com/
> 10. [85]mailto:[82][81]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 11. [83][86][82]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 12. [87]mailto:[84][83]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 13. [85][88][84]http://mewe.com/
> 14. [89]mailto:[86][85]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 15. [87][90][86]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 16. [91]mailto:[88][87]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 17. [92]mailto:[89][88]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 18. [90][93][89]http://mewe.com/
> 19. [94]mailto:[91][90]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 20. [92][95][91]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 21. [96]mailto:[93][92]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 22. [97]mailto:[94][93]starchild at lp.org
> 23. [98]mailto:[95][94]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 24. [96][99][95]http://mewe.com/
> 25. [100]mailto:[97][96]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 26. [98][101][97]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 27. [102]mailto:[99][98]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 28. [100][103][99]http://mewe.com/
> 29. [104]mailto:[101][100]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 30. [102][105][101]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 31. [106]mailto:[103][102]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 32. [107]mailto:[104][103]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 33. [105][108][104]http://mewe.com/
> 34. [109]mailto:[106][105]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 35. [107][110][106]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 36. [111]mailto:[108][107]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 37. [112]mailto:[109]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 38. [110][113][108]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 39. [114]mailto:[111]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 40. [112][115][109]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>
> --
> --
> In Liberty,
> Caryn Ann Harlos
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
(Alaska,
> Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
Washington)
> - [113]Caryn.Ann. [116]Harlos at LP.org
> Communications Director, [114]Libertarian Party of Colorado
> 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
>
> References
>
> 1. [117]mailto:[110]starchild at lp.org
> 2. [118]mailto:[111]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 3. [119]mailto:[112]starchild at lp.org
> 4. [120]mailto:[113]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 5. [121]mailto:[114]starchild at lp.org
> 6. [122]mailto:[115]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 7. [123][116]http://mewe.com/
> 8. [124]mailto:[117]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 9. [125][118]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 10. [126]mailto:[119]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 11. [127][120]http://mewe.com/
> 12. [128]mailto:[121]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 13. [129][122]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 14. [130]mailto:[123]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 15. [131]mailto:[124]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 16. [132][125]http://mewe.com/
> 17. [133]mailto:[126]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 18. [134][127]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 19. [135]mailto:[128]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 20. [136]mailto:[129]starchild at lp.org
> 21. [137]mailto:[130]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 22. [138][131]http://mewe.com/
> 23. [139]mailto:[132]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 24. [140][133]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 25. [141]mailto:[134]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 26. [142][135]http://mewe.com/
> 27. [143]mailto:[136]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 28. [144][137]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 29. [145]mailto:[138]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 30. [146]mailto:[139]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 31. [147][140]http://mewe.com/
> 32. [148]mailto:[141]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 33. [149][142]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 34. [150]mailto:[143]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 35. [151][144]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 36. [152][145]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#
cite_note-2
> 37. [153]mailto:[146]starchild at lp.org
> 38. [154]mailto:[147]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 39. [155]mailto:[148]starchild at lp.org
> 40. [156]mailto:[149]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 41. [157][150]http://mewe.com/
> 42. [158]mailto:[151]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 43. [159][152]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 44. [160]mailto:[153]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 45. [161][154]http://mewe.com/
> 46. [162]mailto:[155]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 47. [163][156]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 48. [164]mailto:[157]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 49. [165]mailto:[158]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 50. [166][159]http://mewe.com/
> 51. [167]mailto:[160]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 52. [168][161]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 53. [169]mailto:[162]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 54. [170]mailto:[163]starchild at lp.org
> 55. [171]mailto:[164]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 56. [172][165]http://mewe.com/
> 57. [173]mailto:[166]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 58. [174][167]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 59. [175]mailto:[168]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 60. [176][169]http://mewe.com/
> 61. [177]mailto:[170]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 62. [178][171]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 63. [179]mailto:[172]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 64. [180]mailto:[173]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 65. [181][174]http://mewe.com/
> 66. [182]mailto:[175]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 67. [183][176]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 68. [184]mailto:[177]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 69. [185]mailto:[178]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 70. [186][179]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 71. [187]mailto:[180]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 72. [188][181]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 73. [189]mailto:[182]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 74. [190]mailto:[183]Harlos at LP.org
> 75. [191]mailto:[184]Harlos at LP.org
> 76. [192][185]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#
cite_note-2
> 77. [193]mailto:[186]starchild at lp.org
> 78. [194]mailto:[187]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 79. [195]mailto:[188]starchild at lp.org
> 80. [196]mailto:[189]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 81. [197][190]http://mewe.com/
> 82. [198]mailto:[191]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 83. [199][192]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 84. [200]mailto:[193]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 85. [201][194]http://mewe.com/
> 86. [202]mailto:[195]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 87. [203][196]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 88. [204]mailto:[197]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 89. [205]mailto:[198]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 90. [206][199]http://mewe.com/
> 91. [207]mailto:[200]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 92. [208][201]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 93. [209]mailto:[202]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 94. [210]mailto:[203]starchild at lp.org
> 95. [211]mailto:[204]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 96. [205]http://mewe.com/
> 97. mailto:[206]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 98. [207]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 99. mailto:[208]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 100. [209]http://mewe.com/
> 101. mailto:[210]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 102. [211]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 103. mailto:[212]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 104. mailto:[213]RealReform at earthlink.net
> 105. [214]http://mewe.com/
> 106. mailto:[215]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
> 107. [216]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
> 108. mailto:[217]VoteVohra at gmail.com
> 109. mailto:[218]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 110. [219]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 111. mailto:[220]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 112. [221]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 113. mailto:[222]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 114. [223]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
References
1. mailto:[224]RealReform at earthlink.net
2. mailto:[225]starchild at lp.org
3. mailto:[226]RealReform at earthlink.net
4. mailto:[227]starchild at lp.org
5. mailto:[228]RealReform at earthlink.net
6. mailto:[229]starchild at lp.org
7. mailto:[230]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
8. [231]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
9. mailto:[232]VoteVohra at gmail.com
10. [233]http://mewe.com/
11. mailto:[8][11][12][234]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
12. tel:317-850-0726
13. [235]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
14. mailto:[10][13][14][236]VoteVohra at gmail.com
15. mailto:[11][14][15][237]RealReform at earthlink.net
16. [238]http://mewe.com/
17. mailto:[13][16][17][239]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
18. [240]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
19. mailto:[15][18][19][241]VoteVohra at gmail.com
20. mailto:[242]Harlos at LP.org
21. mailto:[19][20][243]starchild at lp.org
22. mailto:[20][21][244]RealReform at earthlink.net
23. [245]http://mewe.com/
24. mailto:[22][23][246]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
25. [247]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
26. mailto:[24][25][248]VoteVohra at gmail.com
27. [249]http://mewe.com/
28. mailto:[26][27][250]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
29. [251]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
30. mailto:[28][29][252]VoteVohra at gmail.com
31. mailto:[29][30][253]RealReform at earthlink.net
32. [254]http://mewe.com/
33. mailto:[31][32][255]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
34. [256]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
35. mailto:[33][34][257]VoteVohra at gmail.com
36. mailto:[34]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
37. [258]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
38. mailto:[259]Harlos at LP.org
39. [260]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge
40. mailto:[37][261]starchild at lp.org
41. mailto:[38][262]RealReform at earthlink.net
42. mailto:[39][263]starchild at lp.org
43. mailto:[40][264]RealReform at earthlink.net
44. [265]http://mewe.com/
45. mailto:[42][266]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
46. [267]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
47. mailto:[44][268]VoteVohra at gmail.com
48. [269]http://mewe.com/
49. mailto:[46][270]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
50. [271]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
51. mailto:[48][272]VoteVohra at gmail.com
52. mailto:[49][273]RealReform at earthlink.net
53. [274]http://mewe.com/
54. mailto:[51][275]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
55. [276]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
56. mailto:[53][277]VoteVohra at gmail.com
57. mailto:[54][278]starchild at lp.org
58. mailto:[55][279]RealReform at earthlink.net
59. [280]http://mewe.com/
60. mailto:[57][281]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
61. [282]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
62. mailto:[59][283]VoteVohra at gmail.com
63. [284]http://mewe.com/
64. mailto:[61][285]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
65. [286]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
66. mailto:[63][287]VoteVohra at gmail.com
67. mailto:[64][288]RealReform at earthlink.net
68. [289]http://mewe.com/
69. mailto:[66][290]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
70. [291]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
71. mailto:[68][292]VoteVohra at gmail.com
72. mailto:[69]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
73. [293]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
74. mailto:[71]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
75. [294]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
76. mailto:[73][295]RealReform at earthlink.net
77. mailto:[74]Harlos at LP.org
78. mailto:[75]Harlos at LP.org
79. [296]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
80. mailto:[77][297]starchild at lp.org
81. mailto:[78][298]RealReform at earthlink.net
82. mailto:[79][299]starchild at lp.org
83. mailto:[80][300]RealReform at earthlink.net
84. [301]http://mewe.com/
85. mailto:[82][302]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
86. [303]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
87. mailto:[84][304]VoteVohra at gmail.com
88. [305]http://mewe.com/
89. mailto:[86][306]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
90. [307]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
91. mailto:[88][308]VoteVohra at gmail.com
92. mailto:[89][309]RealReform at earthlink.net
93. [310]http://mewe.com/
94. mailto:[91][311]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
95. [312]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
96. mailto:[93][313]VoteVohra at gmail.com
97. mailto:[94][314]starchild at lp.org
98. mailto:[95][315]RealReform at earthlink.net
99. [316]http://mewe.com/
100. mailto:[97][317]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
101. [318]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
102. mailto:[99][319]VoteVohra at gmail.com
103. [320]http://mewe.com/
104. mailto:[101][321]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
105. [322]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
106. mailto:[103][323]VoteVohra at gmail.com
107. mailto:[104][324]RealReform at earthlink.net
108. [325]http://mewe.com/
109. mailto:[106][326]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
110. [327]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
111. mailto:[108][328]VoteVohra at gmail.com
112. mailto:[109]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
113. [329]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
114. mailto:[111]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
115. [330]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
116. mailto:[331]Harlos at LP.org
117. mailto:[332]starchild at lp.org
118. mailto:[333]RealReform at earthlink.net
119. mailto:[334]starchild at lp.org
120. mailto:[335]RealReform at earthlink.net
121. mailto:[336]starchild at lp.org
122. mailto:[337]RealReform at earthlink.net
123. [338]http://mewe.com/
124. mailto:[339]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
125. [340]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
126. mailto:[341]VoteVohra at gmail.com
127. [342]http://mewe.com/
128. mailto:[343]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
129. [344]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
130. mailto:[345]VoteVohra at gmail.com
131. mailto:[346]RealReform at earthlink.net
132. [347]http://mewe.com/
133. mailto:[348]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
134. [349]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
135. mailto:[350]VoteVohra at gmail.com
136. mailto:[351]starchild at lp.org
137. mailto:[352]RealReform at earthlink.net
138. [353]http://mewe.com/
139. mailto:[354]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
140. [355]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
141. mailto:[356]VoteVohra at gmail.com
142. [357]http://mewe.com/
143. mailto:[358]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
144. [359]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
145. mailto:[360]VoteVohra at gmail.com
146. mailto:[361]RealReform at earthlink.net
147. [362]http://mewe.com/
148. mailto:[363]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
149. [364]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
150. mailto:[365]VoteVohra at gmail.com
151. [366]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
152. [367]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
153. mailto:[368]starchild at lp.org
154. mailto:[369]RealReform at earthlink.net
155. mailto:[370]starchild at lp.org
156. mailto:[371]RealReform at earthlink.net
157. [372]http://mewe.com/
158. mailto:[373]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
159. [374]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
160. mailto:[375]VoteVohra at gmail.com
161. [376]http://mewe.com/
162. mailto:[377]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
163. [378]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
164. mailto:[379]VoteVohra at gmail.com
165. mailto:[380]RealReform at earthlink.net
166. [381]http://mewe.com/
167. mailto:[382]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
168. [383]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
169. mailto:[384]VoteVohra at gmail.com
170. mailto:[385]starchild at lp.org
171. mailto:[386]RealReform at earthlink.net
172. [387]http://mewe.com/
173. mailto:[388]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
174. [389]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
175. mailto:[390]VoteVohra at gmail.com
176. [391]http://mewe.com/
177. mailto:[392]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
178. [393]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
179. mailto:[394]VoteVohra at gmail.com
180. mailto:[395]RealReform at earthlink.net
181. [396]http://mewe.com/
182. mailto:[397]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
183. [398]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
184. mailto:[399]VoteVohra at gmail.com
185. mailto:[400]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
186. [401]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
187. mailto:[402]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
188. [403]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
189. mailto:[404]RealReform at earthlink.net
190. mailto:[405]Harlos at LP.org
191. mailto:[406]Harlos at LP.org
192. [407]http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
193. mailto:[408]starchild at lp.org
194. mailto:[409]RealReform at earthlink.net
195. mailto:[410]starchild at lp.org
196. mailto:[411]RealReform at earthlink.net
197. [412]http://mewe.com/
198. mailto:[413]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
199. [414]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
200. mailto:[415]VoteVohra at gmail.com
201. [416]http://mewe.com/
202. mailto:[417]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
203. [418]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
204. mailto:[419]VoteVohra at gmail.com
205. mailto:[420]RealReform at earthlink.net
206. [421]http://mewe.com/
207. mailto:[422]jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
208. [423]http://www.VoteVohra.com/
209. mailto:[424]VoteVohra at gmail.com
210. mailto:[425]starchild at lp.org
211. mailto:[426]RealReform at earthlink.net
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
- [427]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
Communications Director, [428]Libertarian Party of Colorado
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
References
1. mailto:david.demarest at lp.org
2. mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org
3. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
4. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
5. mailto:starchild at lp.org
6. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
7. mailto:starchild at lp.org
8. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
9. mailto:starchild at lp.org
10. http://mewe.com/
11. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
12. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
13. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
14. http://mewe.com/
15. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
16. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
17. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
18. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
19. http://mewe.com/
20. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
21. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
22. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
23. mailto:starchild at lp.org
24. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
25. http://mewe.com/
26. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
27. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
28. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
29. http://mewe.com/
30. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
31. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
32. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
33. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
34. http://mewe.com/
35. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
36. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
37. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
38. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
39. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge
40. mailto:starchild at lp.org
41. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
42. mailto:starchild at lp.org
43. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
44. http://mewe.com/
45. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
46. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
47. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
48. http://mewe.com/
49. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
50. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
51. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
52. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
53. http://mewe.com/
54. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
55. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
56. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
57. mailto:starchild at lp.org
58. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
59. http://mewe.com/
60. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
61. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
62. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
63. http://mewe.com/
64. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
65. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
66. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
67. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
68. http://mewe.com/
69. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
70. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
71. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
72. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
73. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
74. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
75. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
76. mailto:starchild at lp.org
77. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
78. mailto:starchild at lp.org
79. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
80. http://mewe.com/
81. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
82. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
83. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
84. http://mewe.com/
85. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
86. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
87. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
88. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
89. http://mewe.com/
90. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
91. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
92. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
93. mailto:starchild at lp.org
94. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
95. http://mewe.com/
96. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
97. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
98. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
99. http://mewe.com/
100. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
101. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
102. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
103. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
104. http://mewe.com/
105. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
106. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
107. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
108. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
109. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
110. mailto:starchild at lp.org
111. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
112. mailto:starchild at lp.org
113. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
114. mailto:starchild at lp.org
115. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
116. http://mewe.com/
117. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
118. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
119. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
120. http://mewe.com/
121. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
122. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
123. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
124. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
125. http://mewe.com/
126. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
127. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
128. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
129. mailto:starchild at lp.org
130. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
131. http://mewe.com/
132. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
133. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
134. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
135. http://mewe.com/
136. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
137. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
138. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
139. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
140. http://mewe.com/
141. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
142. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
143. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
144. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
145. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
146. mailto:starchild at lp.org
147. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
148. mailto:starchild at lp.org
149. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
150. http://mewe.com/
151. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
152. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
153. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
154. http://mewe.com/
155. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
156. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
157. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
158. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
159. http://mewe.com/
160. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
161. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
162. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
163. mailto:starchild at lp.org
164. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
165. http://mewe.com/
166. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
167. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
168. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
169. http://mewe.com/
170. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
171. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
172. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
173. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
174. http://mewe.com/
175. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
176. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
177. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
178. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
179. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
180. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
181. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
182. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
183. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
184. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
185. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
186. mailto:starchild at lp.org
187. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
188. mailto:starchild at lp.org
189. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
190. http://mewe.com/
191. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
192. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
193. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
194. http://mewe.com/
195. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
196. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
197. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
198. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
199. http://mewe.com/
200. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
201. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
202. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
203. mailto:starchild at lp.org
204. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
205. http://mewe.com/
206. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
207. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
208. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
209. http://mewe.com/
210. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
211. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
212. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
213. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
214. http://mewe.com/
215. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
216. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
217. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
218. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
219. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
220. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
221. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
222. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
223. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
224. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
225. mailto:starchild at lp.org
226. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
227. mailto:starchild at lp.org
228. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
229. mailto:starchild at lp.org
230. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
231. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
232. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
233. http://mewe.com/
234. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
235. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
236. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
237. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
238. http://mewe.com/
239. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
240. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
241. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
242. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
243. mailto:starchild at lp.org
244. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
245. http://mewe.com/
246. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
247. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
248. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
249. http://mewe.com/
250. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
251. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
252. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
253. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
254. http://mewe.com/
255. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
256. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
257. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
258. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
259. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
260. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge
261. mailto:starchild at lp.org
262. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
263. mailto:starchild at lp.org
264. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
265. http://mewe.com/
266. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
267. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
268. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
269. http://mewe.com/
270. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
271. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
272. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
273. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
274. http://mewe.com/
275. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
276. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
277. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
278. mailto:starchild at lp.org
279. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
280. http://mewe.com/
281. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
282. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
283. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
284. http://mewe.com/
285. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
286. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
287. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
288. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
289. http://mewe.com/
290. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
291. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
292. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
293. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
294. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
295. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
296. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_
297. mailto:starchild at lp.org
298. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
299. mailto:starchild at lp.org
300. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
301. http://mewe.com/
302. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
303. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
304. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
305. http://mewe.com/
306. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
307. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
308. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
309. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
310. http://mewe.com/
311. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
312. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
313. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
314. mailto:starchild at lp.org
315. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
316. http://mewe.com/
317. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
318. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
319. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
320. http://mewe.com/
321. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
322. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
323. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
324. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
325. http://mewe.com/
326. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
327. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
328. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
329. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
330. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
331. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
332. mailto:starchild at lp.org
333. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
334. mailto:starchild at lp.org
335. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
336. mailto:starchild at lp.org
337. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
338. http://mewe.com/
339. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
340. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
341. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
342. http://mewe.com/
343. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
344. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
345. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
346. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
347. http://mewe.com/
348. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
349. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
350. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
351. mailto:starchild at lp.org
352. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
353. http://mewe.com/
354. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
355. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
356. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
357. http://mewe.com/
358. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
359. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
360. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
361. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
362. http://mewe.com/
363. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
364. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
365. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
366. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
367. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
368. mailto:starchild at lp.org
369. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
370. mailto:starchild at lp.org
371. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
372. http://mewe.com/
373. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
374. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
375. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
376. http://mewe.com/
377. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
378. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
379. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
380. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
381. http://mewe.com/
382. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
383. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
384. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
385. mailto:starchild at lp.org
386. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
387. http://mewe.com/
388. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
389. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
390. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
391. http://mewe.com/
392. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
393. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
394. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
395. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
396. http://mewe.com/
397. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
398. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
399. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
400. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
401. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
402. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
403. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
404. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
405. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
406. mailto:Harlos at LP.org
407. http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge#cite_note-2
408. mailto:starchild at lp.org
409. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
410. mailto:starchild at lp.org
411. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
412. http://mewe.com/
413. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
414. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
415. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
416. http://mewe.com/
417. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
418. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
419. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
420. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
421. http://mewe.com/
422. mailto:jeffrey.hewitt at lp.org
423. http://www.VoteVohra.com/
424. mailto:VoteVohra at gmail.com
425. mailto:starchild at lp.org
426. mailto:RealReform at earthlink.net
427. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
428. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list