<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>We are doomed because Libertarians seem to think we are a true democracy.</div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature"><br></div><div id="AppleMailSignature">Daniel Hayes</div><div id="AppleMailSignature">LNC At Large Member <br><br>Sent from my iPhone</div><div><br>On Oct 30, 2016, at 7:01 PM, Ken Moellman <<a href="mailto:ken.moellman@lpky.org">ken.moellman@lpky.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">If we, as an organization, are to
demand 100% compliance of our L-branded elected officials, even if
it goes against the will of their constituency, then we are a
doomed organization. <br>
<br>
If I misunderstood your statement in response to the audacious
caucus, then I apologize.<br>
<br>
Everything else is not relevant to the topic at hand.<br>
<br>
Ken<br>
<br>
On 10/30/2016 03:27 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:CAL4U=_oWuxs58ebZ+2m5Dd+mmWUUNOkGirWY0ApVDw-JFiUtEA@mail.gmail.com" type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Ken,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I characterized your response to the original motion as
being silly because that is how you treated it. If you didn't
wish to be seen that way, perhaps you should have not engaged
in such rhetorical flourishes as asking about "spankings."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>You further mischaracterized a statement of mine. I did
not defend the LNC decision by saying there was "discussion
and analysis" - I countered the members' suggestion that there
was not an "iota" of consideration by stating there was
certainly that. The consideration may have been dead wrong,
but it was there. Please do not miscast my statements.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>And should an elected Libertarian go against the "will" of
his constituents? Yes. When it is committing state
aggression and expanding government in the most egregious of
ways as stealing from people to fund a private interest? <b>Absolutely
and utterly and a million times yes.</b> With all due
respect, I find your support for your vote - and you are most
certainly entitled to it - the basest of justifications that
is the death of libertarian principle if consistently
applied. I am glad to stand against. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The comparison to Oregon is ill placed. Some members of
Oregon asked us to interfere with the internal governance of
the affiliate. This is absolutely apples and oranges as this
motion has to do with the fact that WE gave money. This has
been made clear many times. And as to your ultimate question,
if we improperly vetted or were negligent in any way, yes the
LNC should be censured by members. The assertion of the "No
True Scotsman" fallacy is what is truly scary - as if there
are not any definitional characteristics of Libertarianism.
Wow. That is a fallacious use of that fallacy, since it never
was intended to be used with truly definitional
characteristics but on making extraneous characteristics
definitional. A Scotsman IS someone born in Scotland.
According to your use, that is a fallacious and that turns the
fallacy on its head. Unless funding stadium has now become
Libertarian. Who knew? </div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div>As far as who the Audacious Caucus is, it is a group of
members. That is all we should care about. I am not part
of them (they not my biggest fans, trust me), but they are
members who's voice deserves to be heard.<br class="gmail-Apple-interchange-newline">
<br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#666666" face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif" size="4"><b>In Liberty,</b></font></div>
<div><font color="#666666" face="arial, helvetica,
sans-serif" size="4"><b>Caryn Ann Harlos</b></font></div>
<div><font size="1">Region 1 Representative,
Libertarian National Committee </font><span style="font-size:x-small">(Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah,
Wyoming, Washington) - <a moz-do-not-send="true">Caryn.Ann.
Harlos@LP.org</a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small">Communications
Director, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.lpcolorado.org/" target="_blank">Libertarian Party of
Colorado</a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small">Colorado
State Coordinator, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/" target="_blank">Libertarian Party Radical
Caucus</a></span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Oct 30, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Ken
Moellman <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:ken.moellman@lpky.org" target="_blank">ken.moellman@lpky.org</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="font-size:10pt;font-family:verdana,geneva,sans-serif">
<p>Fellow colleagues,<br>
<br>
I have a long message prefacing my vote. If you are
only interested in my vote, you may wish to skip to
the bottom of my message.<br>
<br>
It's recently been said that I find the censure issue
"silly". That's an incorrect characterization of my
thoughts on this matter. To come to a decision on
this, I've taken multiple steps.<br>
<br>
I have thought long and hard about this issue. I've
observed the sentiments of you, my colleagues on the
LNC. I have spoken with some others, as well, both
inside and outside the party, to gauge my feelings
against the real world. And I have read the letter
from Assemblyman Moore, sent to members of the LNC in
confidence. All along, I've taken notes and reviewed
those notes repeatedly. <br>
<br>
With the vote deadline impending, and wanting to give
the primary Region 3 Representative appropriate time
to counter my vote, if he desires to do so, I give you
my thoughts and vote today.<br>
<br>
Assemblyman Moore's letter clarified what the "Cops
Tax" actually was, and I believe some people have a
mistaken impression on what it is. Based on
Assemblyman Moore's explanation of this tax, one could
even consider this vote in-line with libertarianism,
if you believe that the local entities should have
control of their own local area.<br>
<br>
I do still personally object to the vote on the
"Stadium Tax", though the context provided by
Assemblyman Moore does help make the situation a bit
more clear.<br>
<br>
I also realize that Assemblyman Moore was under a lot
of pressure. LPNV was clearly against the measure, and
Moore had previously voted against taxes in the
immediate-past session. However, the stadium is to be
built in his very own district. It will likely cause
property values to increase in his district. Polling
run by Assemblyman Moore himself suggests that over
60% of the people of his district wanted it. I'm also
told, through sources, that failure to vote for the
stadium would have no effect on the outcome - that
others were prepared to flip their vote, in exchange
for this or that. Failing to vote for the measure
would have made him a political target within his own
district, however, as 60% of the people in his
district apparently approve of the project. (Side
note: I knew about the "over 60% support in his
district" without Assemblyman Moore's confidential
email.)<br>
<br>
Even then, one can claim that Assemblyman Moore should
have said "no" anyway. He should have committed
political harikiri, for the principle of it. I
probably would have, personally, since the Kelo
decision was what drove me back into politics in 2005.<br>
<br>
Personally, I blame us for the failure to change the
public's mind on these types of issues. We failed. We
didn't give our candidate the way to say "no" without
taking a massive political hit only 2 weeks before the
election. We failed our candidate. We failed our
members. <br>
<br>
Should we take our failings public in a very visible
way? Are we telling the world, "Hey world, look here
at this!"? What are the optics here?<br>
<br>
</p>
<ul>
<li>Should we censure the candidate? Should we blast
the candidate for not falling on his sword? Do we
expect this action to be beneficial toward a
long-term strategy to getting other elected
officials to flip to the LP?<br>
<br>
</li>
<li>Should we send a public message that, if elected,
the Libertarian Party expects Libertarians to ignore
the will of those we're supposed to be representing?</li>
</ul>
<p><br>
In replying to the "censure" from the Audacious Caucus
(again, who are these people?), there was a defense of
the LNC given as "there was discussion and analysis"
on the part of the LNC. Is that really a good defense?
You don't think that John Moore had engaged in
"discussion and analysis" prior to casting his vote?
Of course he did. I've met him, and he wasn't drinking
from a juice box and didn't drool on himself. He's a
rational and functional human being.<br>
<br>
We all do math, weighing pros and cons, before making
a decision.<br>
<br>
</p>
<ul>
<li>In the LNC's case, the actions we took when we
sent financial support to Assemblyman Moore, based
on our math, expressed solidarity with those
existing politicians who come to the LP. That was my
math, anyway.<br>
<br>
</li>
<li>In Moore's case, his math showed a benefit to
voting for these bills. </li>
</ul>
<p><br>
We obviously didn't like Assembyman Moore's math. So
now, the members of this body are doing math again.
But does that math result in the passage of this
motion to censure before us, and would its passage be
in the best interests of this party, long term? Or is
this motion simply an acting out based on anger or
revenge? Is to save face, and if so, internally or
externally? Is this body acting to protect itself from
the criticism of its own members, or to accomplish
something positive?<br>
<br>
Moore's vote can't be changed now. So, what is the
good that will be accomplished by the passage of this
motion? Does it outweigh the harm?<br>
<br>
Additionally, I have a very serious fear that the
passage of this motion would open Pandora's Box. If we
censure Moore today, then why not others? Why not
Weld, who as arguably our #2 spokesperson has endorsed
at least 2 Rs over Ls in the same race? Why not Perry,
who is acting in defiance of the will of the very body
we are supposed to represent while holding an active
leadership role within the party? Why not the LNC, for
improperly vetting prior to donating, as the Audacious
caucus (whoever they are) pointed out? And so on, and
so on, and so on. Are we not opening ourselves up to
more of the "No True Scotsman" garbage that already
infects and cripples this party? <br>
<br>
So, no, I don't find this issue of censure "silly" at
all. I find it downright scary.<br>
<br>
What I find frustrating is our organization's apparent
need to publicly focus on what is both wrong and
unchangeable within our organization, rather than
focusing on what is right. We should be focused on
doing more of what's right. What the heck does this
motion even accomplish?<br>
<br>
Finally, it is my understanding that LPNV hasn't even
made an official request to have the LNC intervene;
that some members of the party have made this
request. Once upon a time, some members of the party
Oregon asked the LNC to intervene in Oregon. That
didn't turn out so well.</p>
<p><br>
So, in sum, I find as follows:<br>
<br>
</p>
<ul>
<li>I disagree with Assemblyman Moore's vote.</li>
<li>I believe we need to do everything we can to
politically support our candidates' ability to make
philosophically good votes.</li>
<li>I believe that the optics of a public censure are
good internally within the party, but are horrible
outside the party.</li>
<li>I believe this motion is more about making
ourselves feel good rather than accomplishing
something positive.</li>
<li>I believe we should we note what's happened, and
take corrective action to try to prevent this from
happening in the future.</li>
<li>I believe the current level of action taken by
LPNV does not warrant LNC action, nor has LPNV asked
for our involvement.</li>
<li>Most importantly, I believe the motion for censure
is dangerous to the long-term health of this
organization.</li>
</ul>
<p><strong><br>
Therefore, in my role as Region 3 Alternate, I vote
Nay. <br>
<br>
</strong>If you disagree with my vote, and skipped to
the bottom, I encourage you to go back to the
beginning.</p>
<div>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>---<br>
<p>Ken C. Moellman, Jr.<br>
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative<br>
LPKY Judicial Committee</p>
</div>
<div>
<div class="gmail-m_-4297287125335742718h5">
<p> </p>
<p>On 2016-10-22 01:20, Alicia Mattson wrote:</p>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" style="padding:0px
0.4em;border-left:2px solid rgb(16,16,255);margin:0px">
<div>
<div class="gmail-m_-4297287125335742718h5">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>We have an electronic mail <span class="gmail-m_-4297287125335742718m_-6926646823154954013gmail-m_9149391285218628846gmail-il">ballot</span>.</div>
<br>
<strong><u>Votes are due to the LNC-Business
list by October 31, <span class="gmail-m_-4297287125335742718m_-6926646823154954013gmail-m_9149391285218628846gmail-il">2016</span>
at 11:59:59pm Pacific time.<br>
</u></strong> <br>
<u>Co-Sponsors:</u> Harlos, Demarest, Hayes,
Vohra, Starchild, Goldstein, Redpath<br>
<br>
<u>Motion:</u> <br>
<br>
Whereas Nevada Assemblyman John Moore, a
former Republican who in January 2016 switched
to the Libertarian Party while in office, has
during the past month voted not once but twice
in the span of as many days to raise taxes on
his constituents, including a vote to support
a "More Cops" tax which the Libertarian Party
of Nevada has tirelessly and thus far
successfully opposed, and a vote to provide a
$750 million subsidy to finance a
billionaire-owned sports stadium at the
expense of, among others, indigent persons
renting weekly rooms in motels; and<br>
<br>
Whereas the elected leaders of our state
affiliate party in Nevada have rightfully
voted to censure Assemblyman Moore for these
egregious votes; and<br>
<br>
Whereas we wish to convey a strong message to
all and sundry that while we welcome sitting
legislators in the Republican or Democrat
parties who decide to switch to the
Libertarian Party as an act of conscience, we
do not welcome them if they intend, as members
of our party, to continue voting and acting
like Republicans or Democrats;<br>
<br>
Therefore be it resolved that the Libertarian
National Committee hereby censures Assemblyman
Moore for his recent votes in support of tax
increases, requests that he return the $10,000
campaign contribution which the LNC this
season voted to send him, and admonishes him
to henceforward be a better champion of the
values held by members of the political party
with which he has chosen to affiliate if he
intends to remain a Libertarian.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
-Alicia<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<span>
<div class="gmail-m_-4297287125335742718m_-6926646823154954013pre" style="margin:0px;padding:0px;font-family:monospace">______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi<wbr>nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a></div>
</span></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listi<wbr>nfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div class="gmail-m_-4297287125335742718gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><font color="#666666" face="arial,
helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><b>In
Liberty,</b></font></div>
<div><font color="#666666" face="arial,
helvetica, sans-serif" size="4"><b>Caryn Ann
Harlos</b></font></div>
<div><font size="1">Region 1 Representative,
Libertarian National Committee </font><span style="font-size:x-small">(Alaska, Arizona,
Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah,
Wyoming, Washington) - <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org" target="_blank">Caryn.Ann. Harlos@LP.org</a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small">Communications
Director, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.lpcolorado.org" target="_blank">Libertarian Party of
Colorado</a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small">Colorado
State Coordinator, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org" target="_blank">Libertarian Party Radical
Caucus</a></span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="font-size:x-small"><br>
</span></div>
<div style="font-size:12.8px"><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Lnc-business mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>