[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights

brent.olsen at lp.org brent.olsen at lp.org
Wed Aug 15 12:48:31 EDT 2018


Thought police?  Seriously?  That is about as disingenuous as the idea 
that this is a purge!  We are simply, as leadership within the party, 
reaffirming our values, as they are stated in our platform and SoP.  I 
fail to see how this is so controversial.  It is disappointing.

In Liberty,
K. Brent Olsen, Psy.D.
Alternate, Region 4

On 2018-08-15 09:42, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
> If its not a popularity contest then this is not needed.  Just like if
>    it is already in the platform it is not needed.
>    Sad that so many people supposed to be freedom loving have found it 
> ok
>    to emulate "1984" and "Animal Farm" and be thought police.  
> Especially
>    considering the emulation of the Red Scare at the same time. At 
> least
>    "Lord of the Flies" would have been more entertaing for the 
> spectators
>    to watch.
>    John Phillips
>    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>    Cell [1]217-412-5973
> 
>    ------ Original message------
>    From: Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
>    Date: Wed, Aug 15, 2018 11:12 AM
>    To: Steven Nekhaila;
>    Cc: Caryn Ann Harlos;Lnc-Business;
>    Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for Resolution to
>    Re-Affirm The LP's Stance For Property Rights
> Precisely.
> 
> It’s not a popularity contest.
> 
> Guess how many people freak out the same way about our immigration 
> position?
> 
> More.
> 
> 
> Doesn’t matter.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 8:08 AM Steven Nekhaila
> wrote:
> 
>> When it comes to the government bombing weddings, deporting immigrants 
>> and
>> separating families, imprisoning innocent peaceful people, or 
>> silencing
>> those who speak out when no one else does, we are proud and willing to
>> re-affirm our principles. Our Platform is our muscle, we need to flex 
>> our
>> muscles every now and again. We must embody and preach our Platform, 
>> or it
>> may as well collect dust in an old state run library.
>> 
>> In Liberty,
>> 
>> Steven Nekhaila
>> Region 2 Representative
>> 
>> impotentes defendere liberatum non possunt
>> “Those without power cannot defend freedom”
>> 
>> 
>> On Aug 14, 2018 at 3:34 PM,  > wrote:
>> 
>>    The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.
>> 
>>    It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.
>> 
>>    -Caryn Ann
>> 
>>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
>> 
>>    <[1[2]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> 
>>      Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in support 
>> of
>>      our
>>      LP platform?  Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we do.
>>      (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
>>      libsocs,
>>      all have their *own* platforms.  I support our LP platform, and
>>      that's a
>>      founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a 
>> separate
>>      platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
>>      Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out in
>>      favor
>>      of the *LP Platform*?  I like to see that resolution.
>>      ---
>>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>>      On [3]2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business wrote:
>>      > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
>>      underlying
>>      > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric contrary 
>> to
>>      our
>>      > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by the
>>      messaging
>>      > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as 
>> opposed
>>      to
>>      > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone, but
>>      simply
>>      > distances the LP from their economic views. They are members, 
>> and
>>      many
>>      > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
>>      outspoken
>>      > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of these
>>      > individual members are even candidates in profiled races, where
>>      they
>>      > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is 
>> incumbent
>>      upon
>>      > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity of 
>> our
>>      > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim whatever
>>      platform
>>      > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
>>      > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our 
>> platform
>>      and
>>      > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement from 
>> the
>>      LNC.
>>      >
>>      > ---
>>      > Yours in Liberty,
>>      >
>>      > Justin O'Donnell
>>      > LNC Region 8 Representative
>>      > LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
>>      > Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
>>      > Candidate for US Congress, NH-2
>> 
>>      > [2][4]www.odonnell2018.org
>> 
>> 
>>      >
>>      > On [5]2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business 
>> wrote:
>>      >> We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were
>>      the
>>      >>    platform committee chair for 2018.  I was on that 
>> committee,
>>      as
>>      >> were
>>      >>    several other members of this board.
>>      >>    Did we not do our duty?  Did we leave the platform to be
>>      ambiguous
>>      >> and
>>      >>    confusing?  I don't think so.
>>      >>    Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells
>>      prospective
>>      >>    members where we stand.   We educate from that document, 
>> and I
>>      know
>>      >>    that you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing
>>      >> platform
>>      >>    plank posts on social media.  You know that the platform
>>      speaks for
>>      >> us
>>      >>    on issues of property rights.
>>      >>
>>      >>    ---
>>      >>    Elizabeth Van Horn
>>      >>
>>      >>    On [6]2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>      >>
>>      >>    It is quite problematic that stating the Party's 
>> foundational
>>      >>    Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform
>>      change.
>>      >>
>>      >>
>>      >>
>>      >>    We have gone far from our roots.
>>      >>
>>      >>
>>      >>
>>      >>    -Caryn Ann
>>      >>
>>      >>
>>      >>
>>      >>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via
>>      >> Lnc-business
>>      >>    <[1][3[7]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>      >>
>>      >>      I also would have supported the first effort (with my
>>      language
>>      >>      changes)
>>      >>      as it was a clear support of capitalism.  Too bad that
>>      wasn't
>>      >>      embraced.
>>      >>      On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about
>>      past
>>      >>      actions as
>>      >>      a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more
>>      times I
>>      >>      see,
>>      >>      the more this looks like a grudge match.
>>      >>      As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on
>>      social
>>      >>      media,
>>      >>      are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the
>>      targets
>>      >> of
>>      >>      this
>>      >>      suggested resolution.  Only, some of the players also 
>> happen
>>      to
>>      >> be
>>      >>      on
>>      >>      the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
>>      >>      I was willing to support a resolution that embraced
>>      capitalism,
>>      >> as I
>>      >>      live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of
>>      choice,
>>      >>      and I
>>      >>      make an effort to teach this to others.
>>      >>      Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful 
>> economic
>>      >> system
>>      >>      of
>>      >>      capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP
>>      >> members.
>>      >>      ---
>>      >>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>>      >>      On [8]2018-08-14 14:26, [9]john.phillips--- via 
>> Lnc-business
>>      wrote:
>>      >>      > This is not the same language as was presented and
>>      discussed
>>      >>      earlier.
>>      >>      >    Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
>>      >>      >    I probably would have gone along with the first.  
>> This
>>      one
>>      >> is
>>      >>      toxic
>>      >>      > and
>>      >>      >    the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
>>      >>      >    If it was just a supporting of property rights I 
>> would
>>      >>      absolutely
>>      >>      >    support it.  This is far more than that, and 
>> honestly
>>      far
>>      >>      exceeds
>>      >>      > the
>>      >>      >    scope of the duties of this body.  It is a direct
>>      change to
>>      >>      policy
>>      >>      >    seriously impacts current members and activists.
>>      >>      >    If you want a platform change take it to Austin. 
>> That
>>      is not
>>      >>      our
>>      >>      > job.
>>      >>      >    I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else 
>> to
>>      >>      seriously
>>      >>      >    consider whether they support a precedent of purging
>>      groups.
>>      >>      Not to
>>      >>      >    mention how many of you during the JC discussion 
>> were
>>      >> treading
>>      >>      very
>>      >>      >    carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point 
>> that
>>      was
>>      >> well
>>      >>      taken
>>      >>      >    after reflection, will you be consistent here?
>>      >>      >    John Phillips
>>      >>      >    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 
>> Representative
>>      >>      >    Cell [1][10]217-412-5973
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      >    ------ Original message------
>>      >>      >    From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
>>      >>      >    Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
>>      >>      >    To: LNC-Business List;
>>      >>      >    Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
>>      >>      >    Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for
>>      Resolution to
>>      >>      > Re-Affirm
>>      >>      >    The LP's Stance For Property Rights
>>      >>      > Dear Colleagues,
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution 
>> which
>>      >> disavows
>>      >>      > socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the
>>      Libertarian
>>      >>      Party
>>      >>      > position on championing property rights.
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn 
>> Ann
>>      >> Harlos
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market
>>      and
>>      >>      therefore
>>      >>      > the right of privatization of property as an extension 
>> of
>>      the
>>      >>      > individual;
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian
>>      Party
>>      >>      > explicitly
>>      >>      > supports the right to private property ownership,
>>      including the
>>      >>      right
>>      >>      > to
>>      >>      > do business utilizing that property as capital;
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the
>>      rights of
>>      >>      > individuals to own private property including land,
>>      structures,
>>      >>      natural
>>      >>      > resources and other private space through homesteading,
>>      >> purchase,
>>      >>      and
>>      >>      > other lawful libertarian means;
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but 
>> not
>>      >> limited
>>      >>      to
>>      >>      > land and housing, does not require continual or 
>> personal
>>      use to
>>      >>      exist
>>      >>      > as
>>      >>      > justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the
>>      >> Libertarian
>>      >>      > Party
>>      >>      > since its inception;
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist
>>      >> property
>>      >>      > ownership schemes, including the collectivization of
>>      property,
>>      >>      unlawful
>>      >>      > usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations 
>> of
>>      >> private
>>      >>      > property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all
>>      parties,
>>      >> are
>>      >>      > incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian 
>> Party.
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > In Liberty,
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > Steven Nekhaila
>>      >>      > Region 2 Representative
>>      >>      > Libertarian National Committee
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
>>      >>      > "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      > References
>>      >>      >
>>      >>      >    1. tel:[11]217-412-5973
>>      >>
>>      >>      --
>>      >>
>>      >>    --
>>      >>    In Liberty,
>>      >>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>>      >>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee 
>> Secretary
>>      >>    - [2][12]Caryn.Ann.[13] Harlos at LP.org or[14] 
>> Secretary at LP.org.
>>      >>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[15] 
>> 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:[4[16]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>      >>    2. mailto:[5[17]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>> 
>>    --
>> 
>>    --
>>    In Liberty,
>>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>>    - [6][18]Caryn.Ann.[19] Harlos at LP.org or[20] Secretary at LP.org.
>> 
>> 
>>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[21] 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[22]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>    2. [23]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>>    3. mailto[24]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>    4. mailto[25]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>    5. mailto[26]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>>    6. mailto[27]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>> 
>> --
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - 
> [28]Caryn.Ann.[
> 29]
> Harlos at LP.org  or[30] Secretary at LP.org.
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[31] LPedia at LP.org
> 
> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
> *We defend your rights*
> *And oppose the use of force*
> *Taxation is theft*
> 
>    Precisely.
> 
>    It’s not a popularity contest.
> 
>    Guess how many people freak out the same way about our immigration
>    position?
> 
>    More.
> 
>    Doesn’t matter.
> 
>    On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 8:08 AM Steven Nekhaila
>    <[1[32]]steven.nekhaila at lp.org> wrote:
> 
>    When it comes to the government bombing weddings, deporting 
> immigrants
>    and separating families, imprisoning innocent peaceful people, or
>    silencing those who speak out when no one else does, we are proud 
> and
>    willing to re-affirm our principles. Our Platform is our muscle, we
>    need to flex our muscles every now and again. We must embody and 
> preach
>    our Platform, or it may as well collect dust in an old state run
>    library.
>    In Liberty,
>    Steven Nekhaila
>    Region 2 Representative
>    impotentes defendere liberatum non possunt
>    “Those without power cannot defend freedom”
> 
>    On Aug 14, 2018 at 3:34 PM, <[2]Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business>
>    wrote:
> 
>    The brevity caucus keeps the exegesis of our Platform out.
> 
>    It becomes necessary to apply and explicate.
> 
>    -Caryn Ann
> 
>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 1:29 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business
> 
>    <[1][3[33]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> 
>      Then why not a resolution saying that the LNC stands in support of
>      our
>      LP platform?  Because, I think it's pretty obvious that we do.
>      (Although, I know that the Radical caucus, Mises caucus, and
>      libsocs,
>      all have their *own* platforms.  I support our LP platform, and
>      that's a
>      founding point of the caucus I'm in, that we don't have a separate
>      platform, we instead embrace the LP platform.
>      Do all the board members in various caucuses want to come out in
>      favor
>      of the *LP Platform*?  I like to see that resolution.
>      ---
>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>      On [34]2018-08-14 15:07, Justin O'Donnell via Lnc-business wrote:
>      > This resolution is an affirmation of that platform and it's
>      underlying
>      > principles. It serves simply to acknowledge rhetoric contrary to
>      our
>      > platform and affirm that the Libertarian Party stands by the
>      messaging
>      > and platform adopted by it's delegates in convention, as opposed
>      to
>      > those who would argue otherwise. It does not purge anyone, but
>      simply
>      > distances the LP from their economic views. They are members, 
> and
>      many
>      > will remain so, but the resolution is to affirm that their
>      outspoken
>      > beliefs do not represent the party as a whole. Some of these
>      > individual members are even candidates in profiled races, where
>      they
>      > are espousing ideas contrary to our platform, and it is 
> incumbent
>      upon
>      > this body to recognize that this is a risk to the integrity of 
> our
>      > messaging. An individual or a candidate may proclaim whatever
>      platform
>      > they wish, but when they claim that it is representative of
>      > Libertarian Ideology when it is clearly contrary to our platform
>      and
>      > statement of principles, it requires an acknowledgement from the
>      LNC.
>      >
>      > ---
>      > Yours in Liberty,
>      >
>      > Justin O'Donnell
>      > LNC Region 8 Representative
>      > LPNH Alternate- LNC Platform Committee
>      > Chair- LPNH Platform Committee
>      > Candidate for US Congress, NH-2
> 
>      > [2][4][35]www.odonnell2018.org
> 
>      >
>      > On [36]2018-08-14 15:01, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business 
> wrote:
>      >> We have a platform that states what we stand for, and you were
>      the
>      >>    platform committee chair for 2018.  I was on that committee,
>      as
>      >> were
>      >>    several other members of this board.
>      >>    Did we not do our duty?  Did we leave the platform to be
>      ambiguous
>      >> and
>      >>    confusing?  I don't think so.
>      >>    Our wonderful LP platform speaks for the LP, and tells
>      prospective
>      >>    members where we stand.   We educate from that document, and 
> I
>      know
>      >>    that you understand this, as you were instrumental in doing
>      >> platform
>      >>    plank posts on social media.  You know that the platform
>      speaks for
>      >> us
>      >>    on issues of property rights.
>      >>
>      >>    ---
>      >>    Elizabeth Van Horn
>      >>
>      >>    On [37]2018-08-14 14:55, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>      >>
>      >>    It is quite problematic that stating the Party's 
> foundational
>      >>    Principles is controversial or thought to need a platform
>      change.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    We have gone far from our roots.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    -Caryn Ann
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>    On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM Elizabeth Van Horn via
>      >> Lnc-business
>      >>    <[1][3][5[38]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>      >>
>      >>      I also would have supported the first effort (with my
>      language
>      >>      changes)
>      >>      as it was a clear support of capitalism.  Too bad that
>      wasn't
>      >>      embraced.
>      >>      On this list I've seen multiple times someone talk about
>      past
>      >>      actions as
>      >>      a reason, (we denounced that, so why not this?) the more
>      times I
>      >>      see,
>      >>      the more this looks like a grudge match.
>      >>      As the players in this drama, and yes it's a big drama on
>      social
>      >>      media,
>      >>      are ones that have had an ongoing war-of-words with the
>      targets
>      >> of
>      >>      this
>      >>      suggested resolution.  Only, some of the players also 
> happen
>      to
>      >> be
>      >>      on
>      >>      the LNC, and are now using that position to escalate.
>      >>      I was willing to support a resolution that embraced
>      capitalism,
>      >> as I
>      >>      live my life as a capitalist. It is my economic system of
>      choice,
>      >>      and I
>      >>      make an effort to teach this to others.
>      >>      Too bad this isn't about championing the wonderful 
> economic
>      >> system
>      >>      of
>      >>      capitalism, but instead is about targeting a few noisy LP
>      >> members.
>      >>      ---
>      >>      Elizabeth Van Horn
>      >>      On [39]2018-08-14 14:26, [40]john.phillips--- via 
> Lnc-business
>      wrote:
>      >>      > This is not the same language as was presented and
>      discussed
>      >>      earlier.
>      >>      >    Just to clarify for people who may just be skimming.
>      >>      >    I probably would have gone along with the first.  
> This
>      one
>      >> is
>      >>      toxic
>      >>      > and
>      >>      >    the language clearly meant to be be a purge.
>      >>      >    If it was just a supporting of property rights I 
> would
>      >>      absolutely
>      >>      >    support it.  This is far more than that, and honestly
>      far
>      >>      exceeds
>      >>      > the
>      >>      >    scope of the duties of this body.  It is a direct
>      change to
>      >>      policy
>      >>      >    seriously impacts current members and activists.
>      >>      >    If you want a platform change take it to Austin. That
>      is not
>      >>      our
>      >>      > job.
>      >>      >    I will be voting no on this, and urge everyone else 
> to
>      >>      seriously
>      >>      >    consider whether they support a precedent of purging
>      groups.
>      >>      Not to
>      >>      >    mention how many of you during the JC discussion were
>      >> treading
>      >>      very
>      >>      >    carefully about not exceeding our scope, a point that
>      was
>      >> well
>      >>      taken
>      >>      >    after reflection, will you be consistent here?
>      >>      >    John Phillips
>      >>      >    Libertarian National Committee Region 6 
> Representative
>      >>      >    Cell [1][41]217-412-5973
>      >>      >
>      >>      >    ------ Original message------
>      >>      >    From: Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business
>      >>      >    Date: Tue, Aug 14, 2018 10:50 AM
>      >>      >    To: LNC-Business List;
>      >>      >    Cc: Steven Nekhaila;
>      >>      >    Subject:[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors for
>      Resolution to
>      >>      > Re-Affirm
>      >>      >    The LP's Stance For Property Rights
>      >>      > Dear Colleagues,
>      >>      >
>      >>      > I invite you to co-sponsor the following resolution 
> which
>      >> disavows
>      >>      > socialist & communist policies and re-affirms the
>      Libertarian
>      >>      Party
>      >>      > position on championing property rights.
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Co-Sponsors: Joshua Smith, Justin O'Donnel, and Caryn 
> Ann
>      >> Harlos
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party supports the free market
>      and
>      >>      therefore
>      >>      > the right of privatization of property as an extension 
> of
>      the
>      >>      > individual;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Statement of Principles of The Libertarian
>      Party
>      >>      > explicitly
>      >>      > supports the right to private property ownership,
>      including the
>      >>      right
>      >>      > to
>      >>      > do business utilizing that property as capital;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, the Libertarian Party strongly supports the
>      rights of
>      >>      > individuals to own private property including land,
>      structures,
>      >>      natural
>      >>      > resources and other private space through homesteading,
>      >> purchase,
>      >>      and
>      >>      > other lawful libertarian means;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, ownership of private property, including but 
> not
>      >> limited
>      >>      to
>      >>      > land and housing, does not require continual or personal
>      use to
>      >>      exist
>      >>      > as
>      >>      > justly owned property unless otherwise abandoned;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > WHEREAS, these have been part of the principles of the
>      >> Libertarian
>      >>      > Party
>      >>      > since its inception;
>      >>      >
>      >>      > THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that socialist and communist
>      >> property
>      >>      > ownership schemes, including the collectivization of
>      property,
>      >>      unlawful
>      >>      > usurpation of property, and incorrect characterizations 
> of
>      >> private
>      >>      > property, unless otherwise voluntarily agreed by all
>      parties,
>      >> are
>      >>      > incompatible with the philosophy of the Libertarian 
> Party.
>      >>      >
>      >>      >
>      >>      > In Liberty,
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Steven Nekhaila
>      >>      > Region 2 Representative
>      >>      > Libertarian National Committee
>      >>      >
>      >>      > Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
>      >>      > "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
>      >>      >
>      >>      > References
>      >>      >
>      >>      >    1. tel:[42]217-412-5973
>      >>
>      >>      --
>      >>
>      >>    --
>      >>    In Liberty,
>      >>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>      >>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee 
> Secretary
>      >>    - [2][43]Caryn.Ann.[44] Harlos at LP.org or[45] 
> Secretary at LP.org.
>      >>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[46] 
> 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:[4][6[47]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>      >>    2. mailto:[5[48]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 
>    --
> 
>    --
>    In Liberty,
>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>    - [6][49]Caryn.Ann.[50] Harlos at LP.org or[51] Secretary at LP.org.
> 
>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[52] 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:[7[53]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    2. [8][54]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>    3. mailto:[9[55]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    4. mailto:[10[56]]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    5. mailto:[11[57]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>    6. mailto:[12[58]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 
>    --
> 
>    --
>    In Liberty,
>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>    - [13][59]Caryn.Ann.[60] Harlos at LP.org or[61] Secretary at LP.org.
>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[62] 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[63]:steven.nekhaila at lp.org
>    2. mailto[64]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    3. mailto[65]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    4. [66]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>    5. mailto[67]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    6. mailto[68]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    7. mailto[69]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    8. [70]http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>    9. mailto[71]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   10. mailto[72]:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   11. mailto[73]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   12. mailto[74]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   13. mailto[75]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
> 
> References
> 
>    1. tel:217-412-5973
>    2. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    3. tel:2018-08-14 15
>    4. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>    5. tel:2018-08-14 15
>    6. tel:2018-08-14 14
>    7. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    8. tel:2018-08-14 14
>    9. http://john.ph/
>   10. tel:217-412-5973
>   11. tel:217-412-5973
>   12. http://Caryn.An/
>   13. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>   14. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>   15. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>   16. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   17. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   18. http://Caryn.An/
>   19. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>   20. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>   21. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>   22. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   23. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>   24. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   25. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   26. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   27. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   28. http://Caryn.An/
>   29. mailto:
> Harlos at LP.org
>   30. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>   31. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>   32. mailto:]steven.nekhaila at lp.org
>   33. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   34. tel:2018-08-14 15
>   35. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>   36. tel:2018-08-14 15
>   37. tel:2018-08-14 14
>   38. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   39. tel:2018-08-14 14
>   40. http://john.ph/
>   41. tel:217-412-5973
>   42. tel:217-412-5973
>   43. http://Caryn.An/
>   44. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>   45. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>   46. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>   47. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   48. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   49. http://Caryn.An/
>   50. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>   51. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>   52. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>   53. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   54. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>   55. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   56. mailto:]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   57. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   58. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   59. http://Caryn.An/
>   60. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
>   61. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
>   62. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
>   63. mailto::steven.nekhaila at lp.org
>   64. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   65. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   66. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>   67. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   68. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   69. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   70. http://www.odonnell2018.org/
>   71. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   72. mailto::lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   73. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   74. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   75. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org




More information about the Lnc-business mailing list