[Lnc-business] Agenda in Phoenix

Caryn Ann Harlos caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Sat Jul 21 09:33:15 EDT 2018


What John expressed was an EQUITABLE action, not an action in LAW.  to use
the legal analogy.

-Caryn Ann

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 7:32 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
wrote:

> John,
>
> You nailed it.
>
> Money quotes:
>
> ===Most importantly it was unanimously and unambiguously
>    expressed that having NO JC was never anyone's intent or desire, and
>    that needed to be fixed somehow.===
>
> ==  C) having no JC is most definitely a violation of the SPIRIT and
> intent
>    of those rules abd the people who drafted them.
>    D) again, we are Libertarians and being able to recognize rules and
>    laws that failed, then do something about it is who we are! Or at least
>    supposed to be.===
>
> One correction:  I am amenable to many different email options, not just a
> multi-round vote.
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 7:30 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
> > wrote:
>
>> Elizabeth-
>>
>> =="rob people of it's right"==
>>
>> It is what happened.  It doesn't require a design to do so.
>>
>> ===Nor, is there a right to force members to accept breaking the bylaws.
>> ===
>>
>> Put the decision to them since it is *their* rights being affected.
>>
>> ==equity:   the quality of being fair and impartial.==
>>
>> I am using the legal definitions: https://patch.com
>> /florida/templeterrace/court-of-law-vs-court-of-equity-why-
>> it-matters-to-you-9
>>
>> -Caryn Ann
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 7:10 AM, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business <
>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>
>>>    Elizabeth, by all means, represent what you feel is the will of your
>>>    region, just as I am doing.
>>>      The only part of my reply specifically directed at you was the first
>>>    2 paragraphs, which only addressed your statement about the
>>> legalities.
>>>    *for those tired of reading on this subject, it is about to get TLDR,
>>>    skip to the end or just skip if you like*
>>>    Having said that, I did receive several responses echoing your
>>>    statement regarding those legality/rules issues.  However, those same
>>>    replies also expressed dissatisfaction in the results.  They responded
>>>    that while those MAY represent the rules, they could see multiple
>>>    interpretations.  Most importantly it was unanimously and
>>> unambiguously
>>>    expressed that having NO JC was never anyone's intent or desire, and
>>>    that needed to be fixed somehow.
>>>    I also feel compelled to point out that those same thoughts have been
>>>    echoed to me from Libertarian friends across the country, including a
>>>    large number in your region where I have many friends and family.
>>>     While this response has not been unanimous, it has been far more than
>>>    those who support the rules saying no JC, and again most importantly
>>>    even those who agree with that interpretation follow up with that not
>>>    being their intent or desire.  The ones I reached out to were all
>>>    delegates, and I received lots of voluntary input from others.
>>>    I even agree that is a possible interpretation of the rules. 100%
>>>    correct that on the surface the rules can be read that way.  However,
>>> I
>>>    also point out we are way beyond those rules as there are:
>>>     A) other interpretations
>>>    B) the very real interpretation that we also have to take into account
>>>    that those rules never took this situation into account
>>>    C) having no JC is most definitely a violation of the SPIRIT and
>>> intent
>>>    of those rules abd the people who drafted them.
>>>    D) again, we are Libertarians and being able to recognize rules and
>>>    laws that failed, then do something about it is who we are! Or at
>>> least
>>>    supposed to be.
>>>    The intent and desire to have a JC has been close to unanimous,
>>>    excepting a few hardcore anarchists who would vote NOTA on almost
>>>    everything.  As has the desire to get it done and move on.  The only
>>>    debate has been method. The largest # I have seen has supported some
>>>    wording or other of taking top 7 with or without LNC approval.
>>>    A smaller # tho still significant likes an email ballot (tho very few
>>>    want multiple rounds to reach a majority as per Ms Harlos' suggestion,
>>>    most want just one round with take top 7 or no JC as the options).
>>> Most
>>>    from region 1.
>>>    The no JC at all # does exist, mostly from 8, 5, and 3.
>>>    A very large percentage want us to just shut up and let it ride with
>>>    the JC's recommendation/decision. From all over.
>>>    Did I poll every delegate? No, but well over 400 directly or watching
>>>    their interactions on the subject.
>>>    So all that being TLDR. I stand by my stance, not just in my region,
>>>    but nationally.  I will accept the JC that has formed (however you
>>> want
>>>    to phrase it coming about) and abide by their rulings.
>>>    John Phillips
>>>    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>>>    Cell [1]217-412-5973
>>>
>>>    ------ Original message------
>>>    From: Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>    Date: Fri, Jul 20, 2018 11:11 PM
>>>    To: Richard Longstreth;
>>>    Cc: [2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org[3];john.phillips at lp.org;
>>>    Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Agenda in Phoenix
>>>
>>>    I'd replied to John Phillips, he's the Region 6 rep.
>>>    Also, I've already stated my position.  I'd wanted to have the LNC
>>>    approve the top seven, I co-sponsored that motion.  Only, when took
>>> the
>>>    discussion to my region, multiple members, including officers, state
>>>    chairs, VCs, etc, of Region 3 were adamant that under our bylaws
>>>    there's no JC, and no way to get one.  Me stating this on the LNC
>>> email
>>>    list is just that, me stating what my region has said, and wants.
>>>    I've no idea why you're making comments about "do not turn this
>>>    personal"??  I've said nothing personal. Don't project onto me.
>>>    What I have done is point out that another regional rep isn't speaking
>>>    for my region.
>>>    As for my reply to the LNC Secretary, the same.  An officer has a
>>>    particular role, otherwise, they have one vote, same as anyone on the
>>>    LNC.  The LNC secretary asked people to confer with the registered
>>>    parliamentarian, and I have, and I've also read his views on this
>>>    subject.  I went through the bylaws carefully, and got feedback from
>>> an
>>>    officer in my own state affiliate, officers from the other state
>>>    affiliates in my region, etc.  My statements are the result of
>>>    listening to the members in my region.  I've done due diligence on
>>> this
>>>    issue. I've not going to take the time to listen to my region, and
>>> then
>>>    ignore them.
>>>    My representation and advocacy is for my region.
>>>    ---
>>>    Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>
>>>    On [4]2018-07-20 18:10, Richard Longstreth wrote:
>>>
>>>    My Region says that the Top 7 should be and we should move on. We
>>>    cannot simply "You do your region, and I'll do mine."
>>>    First off, the person you said that to is an Officer. Therefore, her
>>>    Region in is the entirety of membership and she IS expressing her
>>>    thoughts from her 'region'. Your words give off the air of flippancy
>>>    and are borderline offensive to me as one whom the comments were not
>>>    directed toward. This is not how we should be interacting as officers
>>>    and certainly not a way to advance the Party. We need to work
>>> together,
>>>    not have an attitude of every region for themselves.
>>>
>>>    Secondly, there is a difference between our Regions, EVH. Mine says
>>>    that the Top 7 are the JC yours says that we don't have a JC. Both
>>>    situations cannot exist simultaneously and this NEEDS to be resolved
>>>    and finalized for all members. I cannot tell my states that a JC
>>> exists
>>>    for Region 1 but not for Region 3; that is absurd.
>>>
>>>    Finally, I have dropped this discussion if we acknowledge that the JC
>>>    exists and is the Top 7 - something I abstained from orginally, but
>>> see
>>>    as the only logical solution going forward. If not, we need to discuss
>>>    this further which is the will of neither of our regions or that of
>>> the
>>>    general membership. Most want to move on from the issue. The LNC as a
>>>    body did not approve the Top 7. The former JC came up with a solution
>>>    and that is to put the Top 7 in place. If we, as an LNC or Regional
>>>    Representative do not acknowledge that solution we are creating a deep
>>>    divide in the Party.
>>>
>>>    Thoughts? Please do not turn this personal. I want to work with you to
>>>    find a resolution that suits all parties involved.
>>>
>>>    Richard
>>>
>>>    On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:46 AM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
>>>    <[5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>         I was in favor of the LNC approving the top seven JC candidates.
>>>      But,
>>>         my region isn't, and leadership has let me know that they think
>>>      there's
>>>         no JC.
>>>         I'm not sure what you're going on about. I'm not arguing. Nor, am
>>>      I
>>>         doing anything, other than stating what my region thinks.
>>>         You do your region, and I'll do mine.
>>>         ---
>>>         Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>         LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
>>>         Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
>>>         LP Social Media Process Review Committee
>>>         Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
>>>         [1][6]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>>>         On [7]2018-07-20 13:26, [8]john.phillips at lp.org wrote:
>>>         Shrug.  If I wanted to take it to a court of law I would have a
>>>      50/50
>>>         shot imho, and that of the 8 lawyers I asked to look at it.  Some
>>>      of
>>>         them thought they could win maybe 70%.
>>>         So i would say the argument for them being the JC is as good as
>>>      the
>>>         argument against.
>>>         However, the vast majority seem to want them from what I see, so
>>>      I fail
>>>         to see the issue that people keep making of this. Just accept it
>>>      and
>>>         move on, it is what we should have done from the beginning.
>>>         On a personal note. Are we not Libertarians?  I find the
>>>      arguments of
>>>         rules and legality disturbingly dogmatic.  We argue all the time
>>>      about
>>>         changing bad laws and rules that have created a problem, but when
>>>      it
>>>         comes down to our rules failing we can't adjust? Seems sort of
>>>         hypocritical to me, actually far more than sort of.
>>>         So my stance is this.  I stand opposed to anything that continues
>>>      to
>>>         drag this out.  I stand opposed to anything other than accepting
>>>      the
>>>         recommendation of the previous JC and what appears to me to be
>>>      the will
>>>         of vast majority of our constituents.  The correct route in my
>>>      not so
>>>         humble opinion is that we accept them, get the hell out of the
>>>      way,
>>>         move on, and hope we don't need them like the last LNC didn't.
>>>         John Phillips
>>>         Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>>>         Cell [2][9]217-412-5973
>>>         ------ Original message------
>>>         From: Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
>>>         Date: Fri, Jul 20, 2018 11:32 AM
>>>         To: Caryn Ann Harlos;
>>>         Cc: Elizabeth Van Horn[3];[10]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
>>>         Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Agenda in Phoenix
>>>      They can disagree all they want.   But, there's no authority for
>>>      them.
>>>      ---
>>>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>      On [4][11]2018-07-20 11:08, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>>      > There's a JC presently electing its chair that disagrees.
>>>      >
>>>      > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 8:24 AM Elizabeth Van Horn  wrote:
>>>      >
>>>      >> There's no JC, so no resolution can be made.
>>>      >>
>>>      >> ---
>>>      >> Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>      >>
>>>      >> On [5][12]2018-07-20 08:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
>>>      wrote:
>>>      >>> It seems that the JC took it upon itself to resolve - it is up
>>>      to the
>>>      >>> membership to complain about that if they wish.  I submit we
>>>      simply
>>>      >>> go
>>>      >>> on about our jobs and stay out of it.
>>>      >>> -Caryn Ann
>>>      >>>
>>>      >>> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 6:22 AM, Richard Longstreth via
>>>      Lnc-business
>>>      >>> <[1[6]][13]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>      >>>
>>>      >>> I am assuming that JC will be an agenda item in Phoenix. If
>>>      >>> not,
>>>      >>> could
>>>      >>> we please add it? If not, are we done with that discussion and
>>>      >>> simply
>>>      >>> not having a JC or what are the next points of discussion? I
>>>      >>> want
>>>      >>> to
>>>      >>> fully resolve this issue the best we can and move forward. I
>>>      >>> abstained
>>>      >>> last vote to approve but my mind is still not settled.
>>>      >>> There is no good solution here, but one of may state chairs put
>>>      >>> very
>>>      >>> simply:
>>>      >>> "I find this whole debacle with process to be detrimental and
>>>      >>> don't
>>>      >>> really care one way or the other how it pans out. Nobody is
>>>      >>> going
>>>      >>> to be
>>>      >>> 100% on this as is evidenced by the gridlock on some of the
>>>      >>> first
>>>      >>> true
>>>      >>> membership affecting votes from the LNC."
>>>      >>> We need to resolve and move forward.
>>>      >>> Richard
>>>      >>> --
>>>      >>> Richard Longstreth
>>>      >>> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT,
>>>      >>> WA,
>>>      >>> WY)
>>>      >>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>      >>> [1][2[7]][14]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>      >>> [8][15]931.538.9300
>>>      >>> References
>>>      >>> 1. mailto:[3[9]][16]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>      >>>
>>>      >>> --
>>>      >>> --
>>>      >>> In Liberty,
>>>      >>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>      >>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>>>      >>> - [4][10][17]Caryn.Ann.[11][18] Harlos at LP.org or[12][19]
>>>      Secretary at LP.org.
>>>      >>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[13][20]
>>>      LPedia at LP.org
>>>      >>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>      >>> We defend your rights
>>>      >>> And oppose the use of force
>>>      >>> Taxation is theft
>>>      >>>
>>>      >>> References
>>>      >>>
>>>      >>> 1. mailto[14]:[21]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>      >>> 2. mailto[15]:[22]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>      >>> 3. mailto[16]:[23]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>      >>> 4. mailto[17][24]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>      > --
>>>      >
>>>      > --
>>>      >
>>>      > IN LIBERTY,
>>>      > CARYN ANN HARLOS
>>>      > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary -
>>>      [18][25]Caryn.Ann
>>>      .[19][26] Harlos at LP.org or[20][27] Secretary at LP.org.
>>>      > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[21][28]
>>>      LPedia at LP.org
>>>      >
>>>      > A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>      > _We defend your rights_
>>>      > _And oppose the use of force_
>>>      > _Taxation is theft_
>>>         They can disagree all they want.   But, there's no authority for
>>>      them.
>>>         ---
>>>         Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>         On [22][29]2018-07-20 11:08, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>>         There's a JC presently electing its chair that disagrees.
>>>         On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 8:24 AM Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>         <[1[23]][30]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
>>>           There's no JC, so no resolution can be made.
>>>           ---
>>>           Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>           On [24][31]2018-07-20 08:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
>>>      wrote:
>>>           > It seems that the JC took it upon itself to resolve - it is
>>>      up to
>>>           the
>>>           >    membership to complain about that if they wish.  I submit
>>>      we
>>>           simply
>>>           > go
>>>           >    on about our jobs and stay out of it.
>>>           >    -Caryn Ann
>>>           >
>>>           >    On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 6:22 AM, Richard Longstreth via
>>>           Lnc-business
>>>           >    <[1][2[25]][32]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>           >
>>>           >         I am assuming that JC will be an agenda item in
>>>      Phoenix.
>>>           If
>>>           > not,
>>>           >      could
>>>           >         we please add it? If not, are we done with that
>>>      discussion
>>>           and
>>>           >      simply
>>>           >         not having a JC or what are the next points of
>>>      discussion?
>>>           I
>>>           > want
>>>           >      to
>>>           >         fully resolve this issue the best we can and move
>>>      forward.
>>>           I
>>>           >      abstained
>>>           >         last vote to approve but my mind is still not
>>>      settled.
>>>           >         There is no good solution here, but one of may state
>>>           chairs put
>>>           >      very
>>>           >         simply:
>>>           >         "I find this whole debacle with process to be
>>>      detrimental
>>>           and
>>>           >      don't
>>>           >         really care one way or the other how it pans out.
>>>      Nobody
>>>           is
>>>           > going
>>>           >      to be
>>>           >         100% on this as is evidenced by the gridlock on some
>>>      of
>>>           the
>>>           > first
>>>           >      true
>>>           >         membership affecting votes from the LNC."
>>>           >         We need to resolve and move forward.
>>>           >         Richard
>>>           >         --
>>>           >         Richard Longstreth
>>>           >         Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR,
>>>      HI,
>>>           UT,
>>>           > WA,
>>>           >      WY)
>>>           >         Libertarian National Committee
>>>           >         [1][2][3[26]][33]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>           >         [27][34]931.538.9300
>>>           >      References
>>>           >         1. mailto:[3][4[28]][35]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>           >
>>>           >    --
>>>           >    --
>>>           >    In Liberty,
>>>           >    Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>           >    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
>>>      Secretary
>>>           >    - [4][29][36]Caryn.Ann.[30][37] Harlos at LP.org or[31][38]
>>>      Secretary at LP.org.
>>>           >    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[32][39]
>>>      LPedia at LP.org
>>>           >    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>           >    We defend your rights
>>>           >    And oppose the use of force
>>>           >    Taxation is theft
>>>           >
>>>           > References
>>>           >
>>>           >    1. mailto:[5[33]][40]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>           >    2. mailto:[6[34]][41]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>           >    3. mailto:[7[35]][42]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>           >    4. mailto:[8[36][43]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>           --
>>>         --
>>>         In Liberty,
>>>         Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>         Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>>>         - [9][37][44]Caryn.Ann.[38][45] Harlos at LP.org or[39][46]
>>>      Secretary at LP.org.
>>>         Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[40][47]
>>>      LPedia at LP.org
>>>         A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>         We defend your rights
>>>         And oppose the use of force
>>>         Taxation is theft
>>>      References
>>>         1. mailto[41]:[48]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
>>>         2. mailto[42]:[49]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>         3. mailto[43]:[50]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>         4. mailto[44]:[51]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>         5. mailto[45]:[52]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>         6. mailto[46]:[53]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>         7. mailto[47]:[54]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>         8. mailto[48][55]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>         9. mailto[49][56]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>      References
>>>         1. [57]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>>>         2. tel:[58]217-412-5973
>>>         3. mailto:;[59]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>         4. tel:[60]2018-07-20 11
>>>         5. tel:[61]2018-07-20 08
>>>         6. mailto:][62]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>         7. mailto:][63]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>         8. tel:[64]931.538.9300
>>>         9. mailto:][65]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        10. [66]http://Caryn.An/
>>>        11. mailto:[67] Harlos at LP.org
>>>        12. mailto:[68] Secretary at LP.org.
>>>        13. mailto:[69] LPedia at LP.org
>>>        14. mailto::[70]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>        15. mailto::[71]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        16. mailto::[72]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        17. mailto:[73]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>        18. [74]http://Caryn.An/
>>>        19. mailto:[75] Harlos at LP.org
>>>        20. mailto:[76] Secretary at LP.org.
>>>        21. mailto:[77] LPedia at LP.org
>>>        22. tel:[78]2018-07-20 11
>>>        23. mailto:][79]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
>>>        24. tel:[80]2018-07-20 08
>>>        25. mailto:][81]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>        26. mailto:][82]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        27. tel:[83]931.538.9300
>>>        28. mailto:][84]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        29. [85]http://Caryn.An/
>>>        30. mailto:[86] Harlos at LP.org
>>>        31. mailto:[87] Secretary at LP.org.
>>>        32. mailto:[88] LPedia at LP.org
>>>        33. mailto:][89]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>        34. mailto:][90]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        35. mailto:][91]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        36. mailto:[92]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>        37. [93]http://Caryn.An/
>>>        38. mailto:[94] Harlos at LP.org
>>>        39. mailto:[95] Secretary at LP.org.
>>>        40. mailto:[96] LPedia at LP.org
>>>        41. mailto::[97]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
>>>        42. mailto::[98]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>        43. mailto::[99]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        44. mailto::[100]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        45. mailto::[101]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>        46. mailto::[102]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        47. mailto::[103]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>        48. mailto:[104]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>        49. mailto:[105]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>
>>>      --
>>>
>>>    Richard Longstreth
>>>    Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY)
>>>    Libertarian National Committee
>>>    [106]richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>    [107]931.538.9300
>>>
>>> References
>>>
>>>    1. tel:217-412-5973
>>>    2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>    3. mailto:;john.phillips at lp.org
>>>    4. tel:2018-07-20 18
>>>    5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>    6. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>>>    7. tel:2018-07-20 13
>>>    8. mailto:john.phillips at lp.org
>>>    9. tel:217-412-5973
>>>   10. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   11. tel:2018-07-20 11
>>>   12. tel:2018-07-20 08
>>>   13. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   14. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   15. tel:931.538.9300
>>>   16. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   17. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   18. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   19. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   20. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   21. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   22. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   23. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   24. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>   25. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   26. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   27. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   28. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   29. tel:2018-07-20 11
>>>   30. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
>>>   31. tel:2018-07-20 08
>>>   32. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   33. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   34. tel:931.538.9300
>>>   35. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   36. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   37. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   38. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   39. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   40. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   41. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   42. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   43. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>   44. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   45. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   46. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   47. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   48. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
>>>   49. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   50. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   51. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   52. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   53. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   54. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   55. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>   56. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>   57. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>>>   58. tel:(217) 412-5973
>>>   59. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   60. tel:2018-07-20 11
>>>   61. tel:2018-07-20 08
>>>   62. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   63. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   64. tel:(931) 538-9300
>>>   65. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   66. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   67. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   68. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   69. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   70. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   71. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   72. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   73. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>   74. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   75. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   76. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   77. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   78. tel:2018-07-20 11
>>>   79. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
>>>   80. tel:2018-07-20 08
>>>   81. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   82. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   83. tel:(931) 538-9300
>>>   84. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   85. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   86. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   87. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   88. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   89. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   90. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   91. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>   92. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>   93. http://Caryn.An/
>>>   94. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>>>   95. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>>>   96. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>>>   97. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
>>>   98. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>   99. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>  100. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>  101. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>  102. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>  103. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>  104. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>  105. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>>  106. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>  107. tel:931.538.9300
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> --
>> *In Liberty,*
>> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann.
>> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org> or Secretary at LP.org.
>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>>
>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>> *We defend your rights*
>> *And oppose the use of force*
>> *Taxation is theft*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org> or Secretary at LP.org.
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>
> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
> *We defend your rights*
> *And oppose the use of force*
> *Taxation is theft*
>



-- 
-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org> or Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org

A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*
-------------- next part --------------
   What John expressed was an EQUITABLE action, not an action in LAW.  to
   use the legal analogy.
   -Caryn Ann

   On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 7:32 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
   <[1]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:

   John,
   You nailed it.
   Money quotes:
   ===Most importantly it was unanimously and unambiguously
      expressed that having NO JC was never anyone's intent or desire, and
      that needed to be fixed somehow.===
   ==  C) having no JC is most definitely a violation of the SPIRIT and
   intent
      of those rules abd the people who drafted them.
      D) again, we are Libertarians and being able to recognize rules and
      laws that failed, then do something about it is who we are! Or at
   least
      supposed to be.===
   One correction:  I am amenable to many different email options, not
   just a multi-round vote.
   -Caryn Ann

   On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 7:30 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
   <[2]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:

   Elizabeth-
   =="rob people of it's right"==
   It is what happened.  It doesn't require a design to do so.
   ===Nor, is there a right to force members to accept breaking the
   bylaws. ===
   Put the decision to them since it is *their* rights being affected.
   ==equity:   the quality of being fair and impartial.==
   I am using the legal definitions: [3]https://patch.com
   /florida/templeterrace/court-of-law-vs-court-of-equity-why-
   it-matters-to-you-9
   -Caryn Ann

   On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 7:10 AM, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business
   <[4]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

        Elizabeth, by all means, represent what you feel is the will of
     your
        region, just as I am doing.
          The only part of my reply specifically directed at you was the
     first
        2 paragraphs, which only addressed your statement about the
     legalities.
        *for those tired of reading on this subject, it is about to get
     TLDR,
        skip to the end or just skip if you like*
        Having said that, I did receive several responses echoing your
        statement regarding those legality/rules issues.  However, those
     same
        replies also expressed dissatisfaction in the results.  They
     responded
        that while those MAY represent the rules, they could see multiple
        interpretations.  Most importantly it was unanimously and
     unambiguously
        expressed that having NO JC was never anyone's intent or desire,
     and
        that needed to be fixed somehow.
        I also feel compelled to point out that those same thoughts have
     been
        echoed to me from Libertarian friends across the country,
     including a
        large number in your region where I have many friends and family.
         While this response has not been unanimous, it has been far more
     than
        those who support the rules saying no JC, and again most
     importantly
        even those who agree with that interpretation follow up with that
     not
        being their intent or desire.  The ones I reached out to were all
        delegates, and I received lots of voluntary input from others.
        I even agree that is a possible interpretation of the rules. 100%
        correct that on the surface the rules can be read that way.
     However, I
        also point out we are way beyond those rules as there are:
         A) other interpretations
        B) the very real interpretation that we also have to take into
     account
        that those rules never took this situation into account
        C) having no JC is most definitely a violation of the SPIRIT and
     intent
        of those rules abd the people who drafted them.
        D) again, we are Libertarians and being able to recognize rules
     and
        laws that failed, then do something about it is who we are! Or at
     least
        supposed to be.
        The intent and desire to have a JC has been close to unanimous,
        excepting a few hardcore anarchists who would vote NOTA on almost
        everything.  As has the desire to get it done and move on.  The
     only
        debate has been method. The largest # I have seen has supported
     some
        wording or other of taking top 7 with or without LNC approval.
        A smaller # tho still significant likes an email ballot (tho very
     few
        want multiple rounds to reach a majority as per Ms Harlos'
     suggestion,
        most want just one round with take top 7 or no JC as the
     options). Most
        from region 1.
        The no JC at all # does exist, mostly from 8, 5, and 3.
        A very large percentage want us to just shut up and let it ride
     with
        the JC's recommendation/decision. From all over.
        Did I poll every delegate? No, but well over 400 directly or
     watching
        their interactions on the subject.
        So all that being TLDR. I stand by my stance, not just in my
     region,
        but nationally.  I will accept the JC that has formed (however
     you want
        to phrase it coming about) and abide by their rulings.
        John Phillips
        Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
        Cell [1]217-412-5973
        ------ Original message------
        From: Elizabeth Van Horn
        Date: Fri, Jul 20, 2018 11:11 PM
        To: Richard Longstreth;
        Cc: [2][5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org[3];[6]john.phillips at lp.org;
        Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Agenda in Phoenix

      I'd replied to John Phillips, he's the Region 6 rep.
      Also, I've already stated my position.  I'd wanted to have the LNC
      approve the top seven, I co-sponsored that motion.  Only, when took
   the
      discussion to my region, multiple members, including officers, state
      chairs, VCs, etc, of Region 3 were adamant that under our bylaws
      there's no JC, and no way to get one.  Me stating this on the LNC
   email
      list is just that, me stating what my region has said, and wants.
      I've no idea why you're making comments about "do not turn this
      personal"??  I've said nothing personal. Don't project onto me.
      What I have done is point out that another regional rep isn't
   speaking
      for my region.
      As for my reply to the LNC Secretary, the same.  An officer has a
      particular role, otherwise, they have one vote, same as anyone on
   the
      LNC.  The LNC secretary asked people to confer with the registered
      parliamentarian, and I have, and I've also read his views on this
      subject.  I went through the bylaws carefully, and got feedback from
   an
      officer in my own state affiliate, officers from the other state
      affiliates in my region, etc.  My statements are the result of
      listening to the members in my region.  I've done due diligence on
   this
      issue. I've not going to take the time to listen to my region, and
   then
      ignore them.
      My representation and advocacy is for my region.

        ---
        Elizabeth Van Horn

      On [4]2018-07-20 18:10, Richard Longstreth wrote:
      My Region says that the Top 7 should be and we should move on. We
      cannot simply "You do your region, and I'll do mine."
      First off, the person you said that to is an Officer. Therefore, her
      Region in is the entirety of membership and she IS expressing her
      thoughts from her 'region'. Your words give off the air of flippancy
      and are borderline offensive to me as one whom the comments were not
      directed toward. This is not how we should be interacting as
   officers
      and certainly not a way to advance the Party. We need to work
   together,
      not have an attitude of every region for themselves.
      Secondly, there is a difference between our Regions, EVH. Mine says
      that the Top 7 are the JC yours says that we don't have a JC. Both
      situations cannot exist simultaneously and this NEEDS to be resolved
      and finalized for all members. I cannot tell my states that a JC
   exists
      for Region 1 but not for Region 3; that is absurd.
      Finally, I have dropped this discussion if we acknowledge that the
   JC
      exists and is the Top 7 - something I abstained from orginally, but
   see
      as the only logical solution going forward. If not, we need to
   discuss
      this further which is the will of neither of our regions or that of
   the
      general membership. Most want to move on from the issue. The LNC as
   a
      body did not approve the Top 7. The former JC came up with a
   solution
      and that is to put the Top 7 in place. If we, as an LNC or Regional
      Representative do not acknowledge that solution we are creating a
   deep
      divide in the Party.
      Thoughts? Please do not turn this personal. I want to work with you
   to
      find a resolution that suits all parties involved.
      Richard

        On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 11:46 AM Elizabeth Van Horn via
     Lnc-business
        <[5][7]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
             I was in favor of the LNC approving the top seven JC
     candidates.
          But,
             my region isn't, and leadership has let me know that they
     think
          there's
             no JC.
             I'm not sure what you're going on about. I'm not arguing.
     Nor, am
          I
             doing anything, other than stating what my region thinks.
             You do your region, and I'll do mine.
             ---
             Elizabeth Van Horn
             LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
             Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
             LP Social Media Process Review Committee
             Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
             [1][6][8]http://www.lpcaucus.org/

           On [7]2018-07-20 13:26, [8][9]john.phillips at lp.org wrote:
           Shrug.  If I wanted to take it to a court of law I would have a
        50/50
           shot imho, and that of the 8 lawyers I asked to look at it.
   Some
        of
           them thought they could win maybe 70%.
           So i would say the argument for them being the JC is as good as
        the
           argument against.
           However, the vast majority seem to want them from what I see,
   so
        I fail
           to see the issue that people keep making of this. Just accept
   it
        and
           move on, it is what we should have done from the beginning.
           On a personal note. Are we not Libertarians?  I find the
        arguments of
           rules and legality disturbingly dogmatic.  We argue all the
   time
        about
           changing bad laws and rules that have created a problem, but
   when
        it
           comes down to our rules failing we can't adjust? Seems sort of
           hypocritical to me, actually far more than sort of.
           So my stance is this.  I stand opposed to anything that
   continues
        to
           drag this out.  I stand opposed to anything other than
   accepting
        the
           recommendation of the previous JC and what appears to me to be
        the will
           of vast majority of our constituents.  The correct route in my
        not so
           humble opinion is that we accept them, get the hell out of the
        way,
           move on, and hope we don't need them like the last LNC didn't.
           John Phillips
           Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative

             Cell [2][9]217-412-5973
             ------ Original message------
             From: Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
             Date: Fri, Jul 20, 2018 11:32 AM
             To: Caryn Ann Harlos;
             Cc: Elizabeth Van Horn[3];[10][10]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
             Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Agenda in Phoenix
          They can disagree all they want.   But, there's no authority
     for
          them.
          ---
          Elizabeth Van Horn
          On [4][11]2018-07-20 11:08, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
          > There's a JC presently electing its chair that disagrees.
          >
          > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 8:24 AM Elizabeth Van Horn  wrote:
          >
          >> There's no JC, so no resolution can be made.
          >>
          >> ---
          >> Elizabeth Van Horn
          >>
          >> On [5][12]2018-07-20 08:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via
     Lnc-business
          wrote:
          >>> It seems that the JC took it upon itself to resolve - it is
     up
          to the
          >>> membership to complain about that if they wish.  I submit
     we
          simply
          >>> go
          >>> on about our jobs and stay out of it.
          >>> -Caryn Ann
          >>>
          >>> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 6:22 AM, Richard Longstreth via
          Lnc-business

        >>> <[1[6]][13][11]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
        >>>
        >>> I am assuming that JC will be an agenda item in Phoenix. If
        >>> not,
        >>> could
        >>> we please add it? If not, are we done with that discussion and
        >>> simply
        >>> not having a JC or what are the next points of discussion? I
        >>> want
        >>> to
        >>> fully resolve this issue the best we can and move forward. I
        >>> abstained
        >>> last vote to approve but my mind is still not settled.
        >>> There is no good solution here, but one of may state chairs
   put
        >>> very
        >>> simply:
        >>> "I find this whole debacle with process to be detrimental and
        >>> don't
        >>> really care one way or the other how it pans out. Nobody is
        >>> going
        >>> to be
        >>> 100% on this as is evidenced by the gridlock on some of the
        >>> first
        >>> true
        >>> membership affecting votes from the LNC."
        >>> We need to resolve and move forward.
        >>> Richard
        >>> --
        >>> Richard Longstreth
        >>> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT,
        >>> WA,
        >>> WY)
        >>> Libertarian National Committee

          >>> [1][2[7]][14][12]richard.longstreth at lp.org
          >>> [8][15]931.538.9300
          >>> References
          >>> 1. mailto:[3[9]][16][13]richard.longstreth at lp.org
          >>>
          >>> --
          >>> --
          >>> In Liberty,
          >>> Caryn Ann Harlos
          >>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
     Secretary
          >>> - [4][10][17]Caryn.Ann.[11][18] Harlos at LP.org or[12][19]
          Secretary at LP.org.
          >>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[13][20]
          LPedia at LP.org
          >>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
          >>> We defend your rights
          >>> And oppose the use of force
          >>> Taxation is theft
          >>>
          >>> References
          >>>
          >>> 1. mailto[14]:[21][14]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
          >>> 2. mailto[15]:[22][15]richard.longstreth at lp.org
          >>> 3. mailto[16]:[23][16]richard.longstreth at lp.org
          >>> 4. mailto[17][24]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
          > --
          >
          > --
          >
          > IN LIBERTY,
          > CARYN ANN HARLOS
          > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
     Secretary -
          [18][25]Caryn.Ann
          .[19][26] Harlos at LP.org or[20][27] Secretary at LP.org.
          > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[21][28]
          LPedia at LP.org
          >
          > A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
          > _We defend your rights_
          > _And oppose the use of force_
          > _Taxation is theft_
             They can disagree all they want.   But, there's no authority
     for
          them.
             ---
             Elizabeth Van Horn
             On [22][29]2018-07-20 11:08, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
             There's a JC presently electing its chair that disagrees.
             On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 8:24 AM Elizabeth Van Horn
             <[1[23]][30][17]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
               There's no JC, so no resolution can be made.
               ---
               Elizabeth Van Horn
               On [24][31]2018-07-20 08:58, Caryn Ann Harlos via
     Lnc-business
          wrote:
               > It seems that the JC took it upon itself to resolve - it
     is
          up to
               the
               >    membership to complain about that if they wish.  I
     submit
          we
               simply
               > go
               >    on about our jobs and stay out of it.
               >    -Caryn Ann
               >
               >    On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 6:22 AM, Richard Longstreth
     via
               Lnc-business

             >    <[1][2[25]][32][18]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
             >
             >         I am assuming that JC will be an agenda item in
        Phoenix.
             If
             > not,
             >      could
             >         we please add it? If not, are we done with that
        discussion
             and
             >      simply
             >         not having a JC or what are the next points of
        discussion?
             I
             > want
             >      to
             >         fully resolve this issue the best we can and move
        forward.
             I
             >      abstained
             >         last vote to approve but my mind is still not
        settled.
             >         There is no good solution here, but one of may
   state
             chairs put
             >      very
             >         simply:
             >         "I find this whole debacle with process to be
        detrimental
             and
             >      don't
             >         really care one way or the other how it pans out.
        Nobody
             is
             > going
             >      to be
             >         100% on this as is evidenced by the gridlock on
   some
        of
             the
             > first
             >      true
             >         membership affecting votes from the LNC."
             >         We need to resolve and move forward.
             >         Richard
             >         --
             >         Richard Longstreth
             >         Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM,
   OR,
        HI,
             UT,
             > WA,
             >      WY)
             >         Libertarian National Committee

               >         [1][2][3[26]][33][19]richard.longstreth at lp.org
               >         [27][34]931.538.9300
               >      References
               >         1. mailto:[3][4[28]][35][20]richard.l
     ongstreth at lp.org
               >
               >    --
               >    --
               >    In Liberty,
               >    Caryn Ann Harlos
               >    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
          Secretary
               >    - [4][29][36]Caryn.Ann.[30][37] Harlos at LP.org
     or[31][38]
          Secretary at LP.org.
               >    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[32][39]
          LPedia at LP.org
               >    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
               >    We defend your rights
               >    And oppose the use of force
               >    Taxation is theft
               >
               > References
               >
               >    1. mailto:[5[33]][40][21]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
               >    2. mailto:[6[34]][41][22]richard.longstreth at lp.org
               >    3. mailto:[7[35]][42][23]richard.longstreth at lp.org
               >    4. mailto:[8[36][43]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
               --
             --
             In Liberty,
             Caryn Ann Harlos
             Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
     Secretary
             - [9][37][44]Caryn.Ann.[38][45] Harlos at LP.org or[39][46]
          Secretary at LP.org.
             Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[40][47]
          LPedia at LP.org
             A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
             We defend your rights
             And oppose the use of force
             Taxation is theft
          References
             1. mailto[41]:[48][24]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
             2. mailto[42]:[49][25]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             3. mailto[43]:[50][26]richard.longstreth at lp.org
             4. mailto[44]:[51][27]richard.longstreth at lp.org
             5. mailto[45]:[52][28]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             6. mailto[46]:[53][29]richard.longstreth at lp.org
             7. mailto[47]:[54][30]richard.longstreth at lp.org
             8. mailto[48][55]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
             9. mailto[49][56]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
          References
             1. [57][31]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
             2. tel:[58]217-412-5973
             3. mailto:;[59][32]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             4. tel:[60]2018-07-20 11
             5. tel:[61]2018-07-20 08
             6. mailto:][62][33]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             7. mailto:][63][34]richard.longstreth at lp.org
             8. tel:[64]931.538.9300
             9. mailto:][65][35]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            10. [66][36]http://Caryn.An/
            11. mailto:[67] Harlos at LP.org
            12. mailto:[68] Secretary at LP.org.
            13. mailto:[69] LPedia at LP.org
            14. mailto::[70][37]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            15. mailto::[71][38]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            16. mailto::[72][39]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            17. mailto:[73]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
            18. [74][40]http://Caryn.An/
            19. mailto:[75] Harlos at LP.org
            20. mailto:[76] Secretary at LP.org.
            21. mailto:[77] LPedia at LP.org
            22. tel:[78]2018-07-20 11
            23. mailto:][79][41]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
            24. tel:[80]2018-07-20 08
            25. mailto:][81][42]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            26. mailto:][82][43]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            27. tel:[83]931.538.9300
            28. mailto:][84][44]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            29. [85][45]http://Caryn.An/
            30. mailto:[86] Harlos at LP.org
            31. mailto:[87] Secretary at LP.org.
            32. mailto:[88] LPedia at LP.org
            33. mailto:][89][46]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            34. mailto:][90][47]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            35. mailto:][91][48]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            36. mailto:[92]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
            37. [93][49]http://Caryn.An/
            38. mailto:[94] Harlos at LP.org
            39. mailto:[95] Secretary at LP.org.
            40. mailto:[96] LPedia at LP.org
            41. mailto::[97][50]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
            42. mailto::[98][51]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            43. mailto::[99][52]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            44. mailto::[100][53]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            45. mailto::[101][54]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            46. mailto::[102][55]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            47. mailto::[103][56]richard.longstreth at lp.org
            48. mailto:[104]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
            49. mailto:[105]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
          --
        Richard Longstreth
        Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA,
     WY)
        Libertarian National Committee
        [106][57]richard.longstreth at lp.org
        [107]931.538.9300
     References
        1. tel:217-412-5973
        2. mailto:[58]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        3. mailto:;[59]john.phillips at lp.org
        4. tel:2018-07-20 18
        5. mailto:[60]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        6. [61]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
        7. tel:2018-07-20 13
        8. mailto:[62]john.phillips at lp.org
        9. tel:217-412-5973
       10. mailto:[63]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       11. tel:2018-07-20 11
       12. tel:2018-07-20 08
       13. mailto:[64]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       14. mailto:[65]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       15. tel:931.538.9300
       16. mailto:[66]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       17. [67]http://Caryn.An/
       18. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       19. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       20. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       21. mailto:[68]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       22. mailto:[69]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       23. mailto:[70]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       24. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
       25. [71]http://Caryn.An/
       26. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       27. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       28. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       29. tel:2018-07-20 11
       30. mailto:[72]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
       31. tel:2018-07-20 08
       32. mailto:[73]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       33. mailto:[74]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       34. tel:931.538.9300
       35. mailto:[75]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       36. [76]http://Caryn.An/
       37. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       38. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       39. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       40. mailto:[77]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       41. mailto:[78]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       42. mailto:[79]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       43. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
       44. [80]http://Caryn.An/
       45. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       46. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       47. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       48. mailto:[81]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
       49. mailto:[82]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       50. mailto:[83]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       51. mailto:[84]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       52. mailto:[85]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       53. mailto:[86]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       54. mailto:[87]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       55. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
       56. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
       57. [88]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
       58. tel:(217) 412-5973
       59. mailto:[89]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       60. tel:2018-07-20 11
       61. tel:2018-07-20 08
       62. mailto:[90]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       63. mailto:[91]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       64. tel:(931) 538-9300
       65. mailto:[92]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       66. [93]http://Caryn.An/
       67. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       68. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       69. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       70. mailto:[94]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       71. mailto:[95]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       72. mailto:[96]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       73. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
       74. [97]http://Caryn.An/
       75. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       76. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       77. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       78. tel:2018-07-20 11
       79. mailto:[98]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
       80. tel:2018-07-20 08
       81. mailto:[99]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       82. mailto:[100]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       83. tel:(931) 538-9300
       84. mailto:[101]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       85. [102]http://Caryn.An/
       86. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       87. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       88. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       89. mailto:[103]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       90. mailto:[104]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       91. mailto:[105]richard.longstreth at lp.org
       92. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
       93. [106]http://Caryn.An/
       94. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
       95. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
       96. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
       97. mailto:[107]elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
       98. mailto:[108]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       99. mailto:[109]richard.longstreth at lp.org
      100. mailto:[110]richard.longstreth at lp.org
      101. mailto:[111]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
      102. mailto:[112]richard.longstreth at lp.org
      103. mailto:[113]richard.longstreth at lp.org
      104. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
      105. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
      106. mailto:[114]richard.longstreth at lp.org
      107. tel:931.538.9300

   --
   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [115]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

   --
   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [116]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

   --
   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [117]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
   2. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
   3. https://patch.com/florida/templeterrace/court-of-law-vs-court-of-equity-why-it-matters-to-you-9
   4. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   6. mailto:john.phillips at lp.org
   7. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   8. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
   9. mailto:john.phillips at lp.org
  10. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  11. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  12. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  13. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  14. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  15. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  16. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  17. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
  18. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  19. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  20. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  21. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  22. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  23. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  24. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
  25. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  26. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  27. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  28. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  29. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  30. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  31. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
  32. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  33. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  34. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  35. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  36. http://Caryn.An/
  37. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  38. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  39. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  40. http://Caryn.An/
  41. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
  42. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  43. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  44. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  45. http://Caryn.An/
  46. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  47. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  48. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  49. http://Caryn.An/
  50. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
  51. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  52. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  53. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  54. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  55. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  56. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  57. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  58. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  59. mailto:john.phillips at lp.org
  60. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  61. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
  62. mailto:john.phillips at lp.org
  63. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  64. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  65. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  66. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  67. http://Caryn.An/
  68. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  69. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  70. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  71. http://Caryn.An/
  72. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
  73. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  74. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  75. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  76. http://Caryn.An/
  77. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  78. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  79. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  80. http://Caryn.An/
  81. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
  82. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  83. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  84. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  85. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  86. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  87. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  88. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
  89. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  90. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  91. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  92. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  93. http://Caryn.An/
  94. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  95. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  96. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
  97. http://Caryn.An/
  98. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
  99. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
 100. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 101. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 102. http://Caryn.An/
 103. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
 104. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 105. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 106. http://Caryn.An/
 107. mailto:elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org
 108. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
 109. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 110. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 111. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
 112. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 113. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 114. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org
 115. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
 116. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
 117. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list