Stephen Meier: Open letter to the LNC

sent to contact.ipr@gmail.com

Nov 26th, 2008

To: Libertarian Party National Committee

Subject: Angela Keaton

In regards to the upcoming LPNC meeting to be held Dec 6th and 7th in San Diego, CA. An agenda has been published at:

http://lncregion7.blogspot.com/2008/11/agenda-san-diego-lnc-meeting.html

This published agenda includes the line “Discipline of Angela Keaton 30 minutes”.

I am deeply disturbed by what appears to be a very autocratic and arbitrary action by the LNC against one of its members who was elected by the party members at a national convention.

The LNC operates its meeting under Robert’s Rules of Order. The Libertarian Bylaws State

ARTICLE 13: PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY

The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised shall govern the Party in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with these bylaws and any special rules of order adopted by the Party.

Robert’s Rules of Order require that notes be taken and that the meetings minutes be drafted and approved. Robert’s rules go on to state

The minutes should show:

All main motions (except such as were withdrawn) and motions that bring a main question again before the assembly, stating the wording as adopted or disposed of, and the disposition–including temporary disposition (with any primary and secondary amendments and adhering secondary motions then pending;

From the September LNC minutes (not yet appearing at http://www.lp.org/lnc-meeting-archives but can be found at http://pauliecannoli.wordpress.com/2008/11/01/an-error-in-the-september-lnc-meeting-minutes/ and at http://lncregion7.blogspot.com/2008/10/minutes-of-sept-mtg-lnc.html)

Angela Keaton

After a break, the Chair announced Angela Keaton had blogged on the Internet some information that had been revealed in executive session.

Pat Dixon moved to censure Angela Keaton for having blogged what she had put onto the LastFreeVoice website.

Angela Keaton left the room after having admitted to the transgression.

Michael Jingozian read the passage to the body.

Aaron Starr moved a substitute motion: It is the belief of this body that Angela Keaton should resign for having disclosed material in executive session.

Everyone in the room voted for the substitution.

First having reviewed the minutes as published I can not find where the meeting went into Executive Session in compliance with Section 2 Paragraph F. of the Libertarian Party Policy Manual. To be in an executive session during an LNC meeting a motion must have been made and seconded and voted upon and passed by by a majority or by 2/3 of the voting LNC Members depending on if all the reasons given in the motion are among the list of reasons in Section 2 Paragraph F sub paragraph 3 “Identified Topics for Discussion in Executive Session”

In the published minutes the LNC entered Executive Session

Campaign Finance Litigation

The LNC entered executive session to discuss potential campaign finance litigation with Alan Mura and the LP membership list rental.

Coming out of executive session, Jim Lark recommended the LNC express its appreciation to Alan Gura for his work for Liberty. Without objection, the motion passed.

It is expected that to have entered into this Executives Session that the minutes would note that some member of the LNC made a motion, the minutes would state what the motion was, the minutes would state who seconded the motion; the minutes should state that the motion passed by some method of voting or another and what the vote total was or if the vote was unanimous or at least no objections. But the minutes as presented have no motion, no second and no vote thus no Executive Session under the Libertarian Party Policy Manual.

This same (at least according to the minutes) non-entry into a Executive Session happened twice more

Counsel’s Report, Continued

The LNC entered executive session for the remainder of Counsel’s report.

Coming out of executive session, Sean Haugh wanted it reflected in the minutes that he had preferred to discuss matters involving him in open session.

and

The LNC entered executive session to discuss the Barr Root campaign and personnel matters.

Now what could Angela have blogged about that could have happened in one of these policy violating “Executive Sessions”?

Could it have been

Quick: Dead guy gave us money. More than FEC allows. Sue to claim that dead people cannot be corrupted.

Patriot Alan Gura of the Heller Case (frm. IJ intern in his law school days) will on the cheap challenge the Fascist State on this issue. We are discussing on to whether to move forward.

Gura is offering to wave certain fees and cap others so the costs are about 15K. If the suit drags on for several years, he might charge UP TO an extra $7500 (Make sure you actually read the minutes b/c it is harder to type and keep track. Sullentrup may be a closet Republican but he does do something quite difficult very very well.)

if it was how different is this then what the Minutes reported as

Coming out of executive session, Jim Lark recommended the LNC express its appreciation to Alan Gura for his work for Liberty. Without objection, the motion passed.

Aaron Starr moved to proceed with campaign finance litigation engaging the law firm of Alan Gura, to sue the FEC to overturn the contribution limits for bequests left to the LNC, budgeting $15k in 2008 for that purpose with disbursements beginning no earlier than November 2008.

Could it have been about the Barr Campaign when Angela blogged

Said in ExSession. I’m within my rights to reveal this:

We don’t have a contract b/t the Barr Camp and LNC b/c….Cory asserted to both Carling and Redpath that they were afraid that someone would reveal data. I didn’t know what the hell they were talking about until it was further explained that Cory was afraid that I would misuse “data.”

Why this is ExSession? No idea. To Redpath’s credit, he, Ruwart and several other believed that this was an excuse. That I am a scape goat.

Lets take this apart. For this to be a topic of a discussion within an executive session it would have had to have been part of the motion to enter that executive session. What motion? Second it has to be one of the stated reasons in

and as such it might fit under Section 2 Paragraph F sub paragraph 3 or the motion must have the support of two thirds of the voting membership.

vi. Strategic issues (only those requiring confidentiality)

But to do so it would have to require confidentiality. What would be the reasons for requiring confidentiality? To protect Angela? Not likely since she is the one who released the information. To protect the accuser? Since when have we (other then the despised patriot act and military tribunals) allowed an accuser to remain anonymous?

On to the motion to kick Angela off of the LNC. The motion was revised to read

The LNC shall suspend the membership on the LNC of Angela Keaton for breaching confidentiality in executive session as denoted in Article 8 Section 5 of Bylaws, in the event she does not apologize with 10 days and commit to never repeating the offense again

Article 8 Section 5 states that the LNC may suspend the membership of an at -large member for cause. What is missing from this motion is a detailed statement of what the cause is. The lack of a clear accusation and supporting evidence makes this motion appear arbitrary and capricious.

Stephen Meier

Fremont, CA

167 thoughts on “Stephen Meier: Open letter to the LNC

  1. George Donnelly

    Nice job of deconstructing the minutes to show how sloppy this all is. How is anyone who was not at the meeting to make sense of this?

    They should release those videotapes they made, instead of destroying them.

  2. paulie cannoli Post author

    I talked to Stewart Flood about this back in September. He said that members can still make their own videotapes of the meetings. I have heard that there is a move for people to show up and start recording them, and for non-committee members to liveblog the meetings. I don’t know for sure who is planning to videotape and/or liveblog the San Diego meeting. Does anyone here know?

  3. George Donnelly

    That’s nice but up until the last meeting it was the LNC’s responsibility to videotape. If we can’t count on our representatives to implement transparency measures, then what value is there in participating, much less investing the time and resources to attend the meeting ourselves and video it?

    If we have 17 reps/officers and not one can video tape the meeting, then why the heck are they our reps?

  4. paulie cannoli Post author

    If we can’t count on our representatives to implement transparency measures, then what value is there in participating, much less investing the time and resources to attend the meeting ourselves and video it?

    That’s a question every member will have to decide for themselves. The committee will also have to evaluate its actions and whether they are costing them more than whatever they are gaining, on an ongoing basis. Those members who continue to participate will, obviously, decide who to keep on the committee and who not to keep, among other things based on these decisions.

    In the meantime, I’d be interested to know who will be videotaping and/or liveblogging the upcoming meeting, if anyone.

    If we have 17 reps/officers and not one can video tape the meeting, then why the heck are they our reps?

    They were elected at the last convention, and have not seen fit to resign. If you want to put pressure on them, you can start running for Secretary now (of course, you can also withdraw later if you wish). Alternatively, you can always stop participating. It’s up to you which, if any of these, is the best course.

    Not that you need me to tell you any of this, but if you want more concrete practical advice, give me a call.

  5. paulie cannoli Post author

    From Scotty Boman, forwarded by GE to the IPR list

    Dear LNC:

    I was disturbed to hear that some of you wish to over-ride the will of the membership and remove Angela Keaton from the LNC. I hope this is a hoax.

    The Delegates elected her. I haven’t always agreed with the majority of my fellow Libertarian delegates, but I live with it.

    I will actively campaign against the re-election of any LNC officer who votes to remove this officer prior to the next convention. I will actively support the re-election of any LNC officer who speaks out against this nonsense.

    In Liberty,

    Scotty Boman
    313-247-2052

  6. paulie cannoli Post author

    From Brian Holtz

    Lots of people involved in this contretemps are shooting themselves in the foot, but as Chuck Moulton says, that doesn’t necessarily mean they are breaking a rule in some actionable way. Libertarians, of all people, should know that not all ill-advised actions are (or should be) against the rules.

    I don’t like Angela allegedly breaking executive session confidentially about contract discussions, but I tend to like the idea of LNC members live-blogging their meetings. LP convention delegates are grownups who can decide for themselves whether to keep Angela on the LNC, and whether her commendable dedication to transparency outweighs public comments like this (at http://disinter.wordpress.com/2008/09/03/back-from-the-rally-for-the-republic/) :

    “they need to put more effort into those displays if they want to be taken seriously. Not by me of course. I gave up months ago. The LP is hopeless.”

    Angela, please issue the narrowest and most succinct apology you can muster for this alleged breach of executive session confidentiality, and then stay on the LNC. The LNC needs to keep hearing you speak for your constituents, and all of us members need to keep hearing your reports on what the LNC does. If you want to give up on the LP, that’s fine, but those of us who haven’t given up think it would only hurt the Party if you accept the martyrdom that was offered to you.

  7. Michael Seebeck

    paulie, we know, but we’re not telling. Lots of tactical reasons why, but the more taping, the merrier! If the meeting has so many cameras that it looks like a Congressional committee hearing, then great.

  8. paulie cannoli Post author

    paulie, we know, but we’re not telling. Lots of tactical reasons why, but the more taping, the merrier! If the meeting has so many cameras that it looks like a Congressional committee hearing, then great.

    Fair enough.

    I can transmit a liveblog here (average 2,000 plus unique visitors per day) if anyone wants to pre-arrange details, unless I get a paying job first (probably not, but I’m not ruling it out).

    Other IPR writers can fill in for me if I’m gone before then, but you would have to take it up with them.

  9. George Donnelly

    Have any LNC members spoken out against this? I don’t think so. Two reps and an alt have joined the facebook group against removing Angela, but I think that is it. Correct me if wrong.

    To apologize when she feels her actions were justified and correct, when the minutes are a shambles and when they have or will destroy the videotape would be a betrayal.

  10. paulie cannoli Post author

    “NotABarrFan”:

    Ms. Keaton not only admits she broke the rules, but says she would do it again. Thus, I have no issue with the LNC disciplining a board member for breaking their own rules. If you do not like the rules, either change them or quit. Simple.

    This is why I’ve been publicly and privately urging her to leave the LNC for the BTP. I would say that anyone who has a problem with the LNC enforcing their own rules do the same. I’ve done it. If you do not like the rules of one organization, then go to another where you do enjoy not only the more open atmosphere but people who are more attuned to your own view of libertarianism.

    Here is my letter to the membership director sent after the Sept. fiasco:

    Due to the actions of the LP over the last year or so and in particular the treatment of Angela Keaton, I hereby resign my membership in the LP in favor of the BTP. Please remove me from all lists and do not bother contacting me again for any reason.

    Respectfully,

    Feel free to use my wording and resign yourselves. If enough people resign between now and next weekend perhaps that would send a message.

    Caveat: readers may wish to take this with a grain of salt. When Ron Paul endorsed Chuck Baldwin, “NotABarrFan” posted messages all over the place claiming that he had spoken with Ron Paul’s staff and that the endorsement was not genuine. However, it did in fact turn out to be genuine.

  11. VirtualGalt

    Jeez, if she believes “the LP is hopeless” barely 6 months after her election, maybe she ought to voluntarily resign to allow some “hopeful” person to step in.

    If you want to give up on the LP, that’s fine

    Umm, in my opinion, no. Not in an LNC member. Unless they’re generally on the opposite side to you. Even then, I think a belief that there should be an LP and in what the mission of the LP is, is kind of mandatory in a committee person.

  12. George Donnelly

    If you do not like the rules, either change them or quit. Simple.

    I think many people are interested in pursuing the former, while keeping the latter as a fallback position.

    The fact is that nearly everyone on the LNC now has no problem with their own use of executive session.

    We who haven’t quite given up on the LP need to figure out a program around which we can rally a majority of delegates to the ’10 convention. We then need to do some rallying and get people committed to liberty, transparency, accountability and effectiveness elected. Rule changes will be simple from this point forward.

  13. paulie cannoli Post author

    We then need to do some rallying and get people committed to liberty, transparency, accountability and effectiveness

    Ernie Hancock, Barry Hess and John Buttrick announced tentative plans to travel to various state conventions next year and do some organizing along those lines. There’s the radical caucus, and you already know all about that. I have some ideas, but it looks like nobody wants to work with me. Which is OK by me.

  14. G.E.

    Umm, in my opinion, no. Not in an LNC member.

    Angela represents a lot of LP “members” whose dues are paid up through X but who have given up on the LP. As a dues-paid member, I deserve representation.

  15. Michael Seebeck

    Possible Twittering on this, other means of info dissemination will be happening as well.

  16. G.E.

    I’ll try to overcome my irrational aversion to using the phone

    I don’t think it’s irrational. Phones are great time wasters.

  17. paulie cannoli Post author

    Phones are great time wasters.

    I get tired of typing a lot quicker than I get tired of talking.

    Again, nobody has to work with me. Do it your own way, please.

  18. Nexus

    “Discipline of Angela Keaton”

    How about someone turn her over your knee, we call it even and get on with our lives.

  19. paulie cannoli Post author

    I’d rather be brief in text.

    That’s nice. And besides my point. Everyone has their own way of doing things.

    Again, if nobody likes my way of doing things and prefers to do whatever they want to do without me, I can live with that just fine.

    Not. A. Problem.

  20. paulie cannoli Post author

    Good lord. Why is this tangent still active?

    I said I will try to be of help if someone wants to call me. I am not sticking a gun to anybody’s head, and people are free not to call me.

    Among the reasons I prefer calls:

    1) I type with two fingers and have mild carpal.

    2) Text lends itself more easily to misinterpretation of emotion.

    3) It gets forwarded all over the fucking place.

    4) It leads to endless permutations of typed conversation, and I have a pathological need to respond to everything.

    So, either call me or don’t call me, I can deal just fine with either.

    But, let’s have no more typing about whether someone else should call me or not. I’m starting to get a fucking pain shooting through my forearm just typing about this.

  21. paulie cannoli Post author

    Getting back to some discussion that might possibly be useful.

    Michael Seebeck mentioned various means of transmitting data, and George Donnelly mentioned proficiency with video conversion. What is the feasibility of a live video feed with simultaneous recording?

  22. TheOriginalAndy

    “I was disturbed to hear that some of you wish to over-ride the will of the membership and remove Angela Keaton from the LNC. I hope this is a hoax.

    The Delegates elected her. I haven’t always agreed with the majority of my fellow Libertarian delegates, but I live with it.”

    I’m one of the delegates that voted for Angela Keaton to be on the LNC and I fully support removing her from office for the following reason because she spread lies about myself and another Libertarian – including falsely accusing us of crimes – so that she could protect the job of the incompetent SLIMEBALL Political Director Sean Haugh (we were acting as whistle blowers in regards to Sean Haugh’s corruption and her response to us blowing the whistle on him was to launch a spiteful, unprovoked attack against us). She then launched an attack against another Libertarian whom though she was a friend of Angela’s – Paul – for him simply point out that the accusations that Angela was throwing around were not true, she even went so far as to say that she was going to get Paul blackballed from working when Paul’s only “offense” was telling the truth. Angela Keaton has proven herself to be a person of low integrity who has abused her position of power within the party. I agree with Mary Ruwart and call for Angela Keaton to either resign or be removed from office.

  23. VirtualGalt

    Obviously people have very strong feelings about this (quelle suprise), and I really don’t have a dog in this hunt… my observation is just that if somebody has in her own words given up on the LP then she shouldn’t be on the LNC, which I consider a position of honor and influence.

    It’s sort of like, if I’m going to a church, and a new pastor is hired who I don’t care for particularly, I should just go find another church. I shouldn’t huffily say “I’ve written you all off but I’m going to stick around anyway just to make things unpleasant.”

  24. paulie cannoli Post author

    Leadership

    Chair

    viagra mp3 see http://pejepscothistorical.org/education/supply-chain-paper/03/ writing a synopsis for a research paper https://www.guidelines.org/blog/proofreading-anywhere/93/ https://scfcs.scf.edu/review/research-paper-methodology/22/ https://www.patrickhenry.org/services/flagyl-200-usage/12/ essay on my favourite sportsperson virat kohli i need someone to help me wiith my essay buy cialis online overnight delivery https://caberfaepeaks.com/school/whats-the-best-company-to-do-a-business-assignment-on/27/ https://greenechamber.org/blog/professional-speech-writing-sites-for-phd/74/ https://goodsamatlanta.org/patients/el-viagra-retarda-la-eyaculaci-n/01/ cheapest online cialis help on a statistics paper get link https://geneseelandlordassoc.org/category/essay-service/44/ research paper topics for business students watch what should the introduction to a research paper include go to site honors thesis ideas psychology crucible homework help https://creativephl.org/pills/24-hour-walmarts-near-me/33/ https://chanelmovingforward.com/stories/esl-persuasive-essay-ghostwriters-site-usa/51/ cialis works better next day resume http download chrome see url http://snowdropfoundation.org/papers/ghostwriting-services-definition/12/ examples of good hooks for persuasive essays https://campcorral.org/help/professional-research-paper-writing-service/12/ esl creative writing Bill Redpath was elected chair in July of 2006 at the party’s national convention in Portland, Oregon. Bill is the Vice President of a financial consulting firm and holds an MBA from the University of Chicago. Bill and his wife Melinda live in Leesburg, Virginia.

    Bill Redpath
    wredpath@his.com
    703-864-2132
    Leesburg, VA

    Vice Chair

    Michael Jingozian, 47, was elected Vice Chairman on May 26, 2008 in Denver.  Michael is the founder and CEO of AngelVision Technologies and founder of Reset America.  He is married with three children and currently resides in Oregon.  He earned a BS in Economics from NYU and an MBA from Bentley College.  Michael welcomes all comments and suggestions regarding the future of the Libertarian Party.

    michael@resetamerica.com
    503-625-2839
    Sherwood, OR

    Secretary

    Bob Sullentrup, 53, of St. Louis, is a computer specialist. He was first elected to the LNC in 2002. He received an MBA from the University of Chicago in 1977 and earned a BA in mathematics from the university in 1974. In 2005, the Missouri LP awarded Sullentrup its highest honor, the Karl Wetzel Volunteer Award, and in 2001 he was elected state chair.

    Bob Sullentrup
    rwsully@charter.net
    St. Charles, MO

    Treasurer

    Aaron Starr  holds degrees in finance and accounting from California State University at Northridge. He is the Controller of a $1 Billion per year manufacturing company. He is a lifelong resident of Simi Valley, California.

    Aaron Starr
    starrcpa@pacbell.net
    Simi Valley, CA

    At-Large Representatives

       

    Angela Keaton
    angela@angelakeaton.com
    West Hollywood, CA

       
    Patrick Dixon
    chair@lptexas.org
    Lago Vista, Texas
       

    Michael C. Colley
    narwhal3@gulftel.com
    Gulf Shores, AL

    Lee Wrights
    rleewrights@gmail.com

    Mary Ruwart
    mary@ruwart.com

     


    Region 1

    Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming

    Representative

    Tony Ryan
    TRLeap@aol.com
    Sioux Falls, SD

    Alternate

    George Squyres
    gsquyres@gotsky.com
    Flagstaff, AZ
     

    Region 2

    California

    Representative

    Mark Hinkle
    mark@garlic.com
    Morgan Hill, CA
     
     

    Alternate

    Dr. Scott Lieberman
    scott73@earthlink.net
    San Jose, CA


    Region 3

    Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana

    Representative

    Rebecca Sink-Burris
    rebecca.sinkburris@gmail.com
    Bloomington, IN

     

    Alternate

     
    Bob Jackson
    jaxonusa@msn.com
    Coloma, MI
     

    Region 4

    Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas

    Representative

    Stewart Flood
    Charleston, SC

    Alternate

    Heather Scott
    Heatherscott01@hotmail.com
    Mount Juliet, TN

     

    Region 5 – South

    Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia

    Representative

    Jim W. Lark, III
    jwlark@virginia.edu
    Free Union, VA

    Alternate

    Berlie Etzel
    berlie@etzel.us
    Shippeville, PA
     

    Region 5 – North

    Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont

    Representative

    Dan Karlan
    Dankarlan@earthlink.net

    Alternate

    T.B.A. – Vacant  

    Region 6

    Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wisconsin

    Representative

    Julie Fox
    jfox1214@sbcglobal.net

     

    Alternate

    Jake Porter
    jake@jakeporter.org
    Saint Joseph, MO
     

    Region 7

    Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon, Washington

    Representative

    Rachel Hawkridge
    Lpwa.com1@gmail.com 

     

    Alternate

    Steve LaBianca
    freedhwy@gmail.com

     
     

    States not affiliated with any Region

    Oklahoma, Massachusetts, Arkansas


     

  25. paulie cannoli Post author

    If I am not mistaken, those in states not affiliated with a region are represented by the at large reps, but so are those in states which do belong to a region. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

  26. Catholic Trotskyist

    This chaos is nothing compared to how it will be when I am elected to the LNC. I will open the sessions to bloggers and make the process fully transparent, but I will also be pushing for platform changes to make the LP more in line with Catholic Trotskyism, and through the power of the Holy Spirit, the other LNC members will be hypnotized into voting for my positions. I will also embezzzle all of the LP’s money and donate it to the Washington Commons Party, Daniel Imperato and the Democratic Party. Amen.

  27. Joe Buchman

    Paulie,

    >>but it looks like nobody wants to work with me. <<

    I’ve liked working with you. Where can I read the plans you have in mind?

  28. paulie cannoli Post author

    From Scott Lieberman

    Angela Keaton wore a Boston Tea Party T-shirt on Sunday of the September 2008 LNC Meeting. She was wearing the shirt while she was participating in the Meeting. I know – I saw it with my own eyes.

    I have no idea if anyone is going to even mention this FACT at the upcoming LNC Meeting. Even if it comes up, no LNC member is going to officially discipline Ms. Keaton for wearing that T-shirt. However, I suppose it is possible that a few LNC members might give her an off-the-record verbal rebuke for wearing that particular shirt in that particular venue.

    FWIW – I have no idea who submitted the agenda item regarding Ms. Keaton. All I know is – it wasn’t me.

  29. G.E.

    But, let’s have no more typing about whether someone else should call me or not. I’m starting to get a fucking pain shooting through my forearm just typing about this.

    I wasn’t speaking on that topic or on your situation in particular. Just agreeing with George in a general preference for brief text communications instead of phone covos that can often be time-wasters IN MY business.

  30. Michael Seebeck

    Paulie, a live video feed will be a direct function of the connectivity of the hotel in that conference room, wireless or wired. I’m finding that out on Monday to see how well I can Tweet out. However, if that’s not an issue, then all it takes is either a video cam or a portable webcam piped into a laptop with a justin.tv or yahoo IM account to broadcast.

  31. paulie cannoli Post author

    Unfortunately, my laptop webcam is fixed, meaning it would face the wrong direction!

    OK. But I am not speaking only of you. I am interested in the overall feasibility of livestreaming the meeting here, as well as simultaneously backing up the video.

    If that is not feasible, the back up would be old fashioned videotaping, and then conversion to internet video later.

    I mean, can we practically do any of this?

  32. paulie cannoli Post author

    Michael, @ lfv

    Scott, the photo in question wasn’t taken at the September LNC. It was taken in October at the San Bernardino County (CA) LP convention.

    I don’t think Scott was talking about where the photo was taken. He just mentioned that Angela has worn BTP gear to an LNC meeting, so it’s not exactly a mystery that she has worn BTP gear, but that this was not the basis of the charges.


    Also, do you have any idea what the charges are? Redpath has been silent, and nobody seems to know.

    Who all have you asked?

  33. BrianHoltz

    It’s specious to suggest that the LNC was not really in executive session when everyone in the room apparently believed it was. The point about not entering executive session properly is void because it’s not timely. The time for making that objection would have been before or during the executive session itself. RRONR p.244 is clear about what kinds of points of order may be raised after the fact. This one does not qualify.

  34. Steve M

    Brain,

    The Libertarian Party Bylaws state

    ARTICLE 13: PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY
    The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised shall govern
    the Party in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with
    these bylaws and any special rules of order adopted by the Party.

    The problem you have is that the LNC guidelines are a special rule and to enter an Executive Session they state.

    1. LIMITATION OF — USE OF EXECUTIVE SESSIONS
    The LNC may enter into Executive Session only in compliance with this policy.
    2. PREREQUISITES TO ENTERING XECUTIVE SESSION
    Prior to entering into Executive Session, a motion must be made, seconded, and passed. The motion to enter Executive Session must list all reasons for doing so. If the list of reasons is solely comprised of the identified topics listed below, a majority of LNC members voting is required for passage. If any topic other than those listed below is given, a two-thirds vote of LNC members voting shall be required for passage.

    The key point being that first statement says that there are no exceptions (not even for Robert)

  35. Steve M

    Brian,

    Just in case you missed that first paragraph.

    The LNC may enter into Executive Session only in compliance with this policy.

  36. Steve M

    Brian,

    Since you and I don’t seem to speak the same language a lot of the time let me try the language of the card game bridge.

    The stated LNC policy trumps Robert’s rule of Order Newly Revised!

  37. George Phillies

    And while you are on the topic, observe that one of our declared 2012 Presidential candidates is being a half hour to harangue the LNC during its scheduled meeting, while other declared candidates were not invited to speak.

    Perhaps a serious effort to offer an alternative agenda would be in order.

  38. Steve M

    George,

    My recommendation to the members of the LNC would be to put a motion to strike the punishment of Angela Keaton from the agenda before the agenda is accepted.

    Steve Meier

  39. Steve M

    George,

    My second suggestion would be that if the LNC plans to enter any executive sessions during this next meeting that they have prepared the motions which are compliant with the LNC Policy Manual ahead of time so they are at least in compliance.

    I also would suggest that Angela compose herself to the decorum. If she can’t present herself as a competent figure at an LNC meeting she will not be capable of running any government agency.

    Steve Meier

  40. paulie cannoli Post author

    And while you are on the topic, observe that one of our declared 2012 Presidential candidates is being a half hour to harangue the LNC during its scheduled meeting, while other declared candidates were not invited to speak.

    Perhaps a serious effort to offer an alternative agenda would be in order.

    You would have to show that Root is there in his capacity as a 2012 candidate rather than as the immediate past VP candidate. And, if you can do that, how many other 2012 candidates have asked to address the body? I suppose Angela could ask for 30 minutes and use them to campaign for 2012 if they give it to her.

    Anyway, let’s suppose you are correct and that Root is there to line up support for 2012 and is being shown undue preference. Do you think there are enough votes on the current LNC to keep him from having his 30 minutes, or otherwise scrap the agenda?

  41. paulie cannoli Post author

    Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
    December 6-7, 2008 Meeting Agenda
    San Diego, California

    Saturday, December 6, 2008 & Sunday, December 7, 2008

    Call to Order 8:30 AM

    Moment of Reflection 1 minute
    Opportunity for Public Comment 10 minutes
    Credentials Report and Paperwork Check (Secretary) 5 minutes
    Report of Potential Conflicts of Interest 5 minutes
    Approval of the Agenda 5 minutes

    Standing Reports
    Chair’s Report 20 minutes
    Treasurer’s Report 30 minutes
    Secretary’s Report 10 minutes

    Wayne Allyn Root to Address the LNC 30 minutes
    Discipline of Angela Keaton 30 minutes

    Staff Report
    Staff Reports 60 minutes
    Counsel’s Report 15 minutes

    Action Items Previously Submitted in Writing
    0 minutes

    Reports Previously Submitted in Writing
    Campus Organizing Report (Lark) 5 minutes
    Various Regions 5 minutes per

    Action Items Not Previously Submitted in Writing

    Mission Statement (Hawkridge) 60 minutes
    Goals (Lark/Dixon) 60 minutes
    Executive Director Search (Colley) 10 minutes
    Budget 2009 (Starr) (already submitted in writing) 120 minutes
    Convention 2010 (Colley) 15 minutes
    Convention Electronic Voting Demonstration (Mattson) 30 minutes
    Bylaws Committee Report (Karlan) 10 minutes
    LNCC Report (Hawkridge) 10 minutes
    Policy Manual Amendment—Authorization of Lawsuits (Lark) 20 minutes
    Policy Manual Amendment—Mail Ballot Reporting (Karlan) 10 minutes
    LNC Meeting Video Recording & Archiving (Keaton) 15 minutes
    Executive Session Minutes/Confidentiality (Fox) 15 minutes
    LP News Content (Keaton) 15 minutes

    Set LNC Meeting Dates for July orAug. & Nov. or Dec. 2009 15 minutes
    Opportunity for Public Comment 10 minutes

    Adjournment

  42. paulie cannoli Post author

    Besides the 30 minutes each previously discussed, what else if anything do you object to in the agenda?

    What alternative agenda items do you propose, or would you just re-allocate the time?

  43. Steve M

    Paulie,

    All right, one issue that has come out of my interactions with the LNC is that there exists a mailing list which in as far as I can tell members of the LNC discuss issues that the LNC are likely to confront.

    In my mind, this implies that LNC business is being conducted behind closed doors. Without even the pretense of entering an Executive Session.

    I would like that mailing list opened for reading and that the members of the LNC should conduct Libertarian Party Business with in view of all Libertarians unless they move to executive session and that such a move be in compliance with thye LNC Policy Manual.

    I would also like to have a group of libertarians such as the Judicial committee review all entries into an executive session either on the mailing list or in a more traditional meeting to make sure that these executive sessions are in compliance with the LNC Policy Manual.

  44. BrianHoltz

    Executive sessions by definition cannot conduct any business. Similarly, the only business that can be conducted over email are votes that then get duly recorded in the minutes. “Conducting business” has a specific parliamentary meaning, and the above sort of complaint indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of parliamentary procedure.

  45. BrianHoltz

    “The only exceptions to the rule that a point of order must be made at the time of the breach arise in connection with breaches that are of a continuing nature, in which case a point of order can be made at any time during the continuance of the breach. Instances of this kind occur when:

    (a) a main motion has been adopted that conflicts with the bylaws (or constitution) of the organization or assembly, unless the conflict is with a rule in the nature of a rule of order as described on p. 17 lines 23-24, in which case a point of order must be timely.”

    RRONR p.244 thus explains that even if this Policy Manual rule about entering ES were instead contained in our bylaws, it would not be exempt if it were (as Stephen suggests) a special rule of order therein.

    The most important example exception is (e): “any action that has been taken in violation of a rule protecting absentees or a rule protecting a basic right of an individual member” e.g. to vote via secret ballot. This underscores the obvious principle here: if you don’t show up and speak up, then you can only object to completed actions that violated your right as an absentee, or that improperly undid a decision that the body duly made previously. Alleged entry into ES without a minute’d motion satisfies neither condition.

  46. Steve M

    Brian,

    You are right Executive Sessions, can not take an action all they can do is discuss and review information. This information being presented is what needs to be kept confidential.

    You are still ignoring that the the use of Robert’s Rules of Order is voluntary. The Libertarian Party Bylaw’s state were are going to use RRONR unless we have a set of rules which we specifically establish in that case our rules are the dominant rules.

    That is what the LNC Policy Manual has done. And in entering an Executive Session the LNC Policy is very very very clear.

    The LNC may enter into Executive Session only in compliance with this policy.

    You are trying to add an exception where the Libertarian National Committee Policy says there are NONE!

    And where the Libertarian Party Bylaw’s state that a specific Libertarian Policy dominates Robert’s Rule of Order Newly Revised.

  47. JimDavidson

    @49 “I also would suggest that Angela compose herself to the decorum. If she can’t present herself as a competent figure at an LNC meeting she will not be capable of running any government agency.”

    Very funny. As if existing government agencies showed any tendency toward decorum, respect for the rule of law, objection to corruption, or respect for individual sovereignty, liberty, and private property.

  48. Steve M

    Brian,
    Given the limited adaptation of RRONR by the Libertarian Party under their bylwas..

    ARTICLE 13: PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY
    The rules contained in the current edition of Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised shall govern the Party in all cases to which they are applicable and in which they are not inconsistent with
    these bylaws and any special rules of order adopted by the Party.

    Does the LNC Policy Manual constitute a special rule of order?

    My position is that the LNC Policy Manual does and I take it your position is that it doesn’t.

  49. Steve M

    JimDavidson,

    Take an agency like NASA or the USGS. Neither of these agencies have much to do with regulation. I present them as an example that not all agencies of the government are trying to take you guns away. For example the folks over at NASA are either trying to put a spaceship onto the surface of mars or they are trying to come up with ways to put even more airplanes into the air space over the us without them running into each other.

    The folks at the USGS are mostly trying to understand where the ground is going to shake, how hard and what is going to slide if the ground does shake or if we get torrential rain.

    Neither group really has the time to spend worrying about how to take your guns away.

  50. JimDavidson

    @47 George, it appears that two candidates are being given 30 minutes to address the LNC. Root is being given 30 minutes and Keaton is being given 30 minutes – though her comments are apparently to be limited to her knowledge and skills at bondage and discipline. Presumably because some LNC members have been very naughty.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0Mzr_A-Q0I

    It is curious that Tom Knapp has not been invited to speak for 30 minutes. He is the third presidential candidate for the 2012 LP nomination that I know about. How about yourself? Have you declared?

  51. BrianHoltz

    How do we know that Root was “invited”? What I heard is that Root volunteered to fly to the meeting and publicly debrief LNC on the campaign. It’s simply bizarre for people to complain about this. I just wish Barr would do what Root is doing. One of them is apparently more proud of his campaign work than the other.

    Steve, nothing I quoted from RRONR is inconsistent with what you’ve quoted from elsewhere. If you’re just going to repeat yourself, then so will I:

    RRONR p.244 thus explains that even if this Policy Manual rule about entering ES were instead contained in our bylaws, it would not be exempt if it were (as Stephen suggests) a special rule of order therein.

  52. Michael Seebeck

    I will post back here on the technical connectivity question when I find out. The rest is just details.

    Angela will be in full decorum. Whether the rest of us decide to take it “outrageous to the nines” is TBD. We talked about renting her a nun’s costume but decided that would be too over-the-top.

  53. paulie cannoli Post author

    Paulie,

    All right, one issue that has come out of my interactions with the LNC….

    Is this a reply to something I said? I’m trying to think what. My best guess is when I asked Dr. Phillies what items he would add to the agenda if he could. So, I’m guessing that you want to add this to the agenda?


    is that there exists a mailing list which in as far as I can tell members of the LNC discuss issues that the LNC are likely to confront.

    In my mind, this implies that LNC business is being conducted behind closed doors. Without even the pretense of entering an Executive Session.

    The LNC has dealt with this issue before. Chuck and some other people would know the details. I think their conclusion on it is/was that if they were to make the LNC list public it would simply lead to cliques of members doing their own thing unofficially through private back channels without involving the whole committee. It’s a legitimate issue to discuss, but there is very little chance the present LNC will open up their email list. The best chance of that is electing an openness slate to the LNC.


    I would like that mailing list opened for reading and that the members of the LNC should conduct Libertarian Party Business with in view of all Libertarians unless they move to executive session and that such a move be in compliance with thye LNC Policy Manual.

    I would like my own private island where I am an absolute monarch, weather is nice, food is plentiful, and there is an endless supply of beautiful young women to fulfill every depraved fantasy I can concoct. Neither of us is likely to get our wish by Christmas.

  54. JimDavidson

    Since they want her expertise on discipline, judging by the agenda, I think she should be in full dominatrix garb. Frankly, I can think of few members of the LNC, none of the officers, and hardly any of the staff who would not benefit from a dozen lashes from a scourge, if one can be provided to Angela.

  55. paulie cannoli Post author

    I also would suggest that Angela compose herself to the decorum. If she can’t present herself as a competent figure at an LNC meeting she will not be capable of running any government agency.

    Since most of the board served with her last term, I don’t think her capability is in question. Willingness is a different matter.

    The only ability one should need to run a government agency is the ability to fire people. Corporate layoff specialists would make excellent candidates for government management jobs.

  56. paulie cannoli Post author

    Take an agency like NASA or the USGS.

    Please.


    Neither of these agencies have much to do with regulation. I present them as an example that not all agencies of the government are trying to take you guns away.

    All of them are funded by taxes, which are ultimately backed up with the threat of force. And for that threat of force to be effective, government has to be able to outgun the citizenry. Over a period of time, governments naturally tend to conclude that the best way to do that is to have a legal monopoly on guns for themselves.

  57. JimDavidson

    Anyone who ignorantly thinks that NASA has not much to do with regulation has never tried to operate a space business. NASA and the US Geological Survey are about control, notably the control of information and access to certain places. It very much matters where the lines are drawn, and who gets to go where.

    Because I am deeply committed to human settlement of space as a cause, I am utterly against the continued existence of NASA.

  58. VirtualGalt

    I agree with George — if Root is speaking retrospectively about the 08 campaign, fine. If he is going to spout off for 30 minutes about his vision for the future of the party, etc., I have a problem with that and believe other potential candidates should then be given equal time prior to the 2012 convention.

  59. George Donnelly

    @41 Paul, simulcasting is very feasible. Cong Culberson of TX does it using qik.com (sp?) and his cell phone IIRC. I don’t know how to do it but if we line up a suitable video camera and connectivity I can do any needed to research to figure out the rest.

  60. Steve M

    Brian,

    So your claim is that the LNC can enter an executive session by thinking they have legaly entered an executive session even though the rule plainly states that the only way to enter an executive session is via a motion.

    Nice try but I don’t buy it.

  61. Steve M

    Brian,

    You said

    “Similarly, the only business that can be conducted over email are votes that then get duly recorded in the minutes. “Conducting business” has a specific parliamentary meaning, and the above sort of complaint indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of parliamentary procedure.”

    Funny under sunshine laws the courts haven’t agreed with you.

    ” In the Missouri case, Colombo v. Buford, an appellate court ruled that school board members did not violate the law when they held a series of one-on-one conversations in person and by telephone to discuss the renewal of the superintendent’s contract. However, the ruling noted that courts are aware that those inclined to violate the open-meeting laws could do so by using the quorum requirement as a shield. If the board then met to ratify publicly that which had already been done in private, the spirit of the sunshine law would be violated.

    This case indicates that a series of telephone conversations may violate the Missouri Sunshine Law if a quorum of members discuss a matter of public business. This includes voice mail and e-mail.”

  62. Steve M

    Brian,

    Let us suppose that the LNC did enter an “Executive Session” even though they violated the special rule establishing it would this executive session be the same one that the special rule adopted? Or would it be some fictitious creation without any of the benefits of the true executive session that has only one way to enter?

  63. Steve M

    Brian,

    You said

    “Similarly, the only business that can be conducted over email are votes that then get duly recorded in the minutes. “Conducting business” has a specific parliamentary meaning, and the above sort of complaint indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of parliamentary procedure.”

    From the Libertarian Party By-laws

    9. The National Committee may, without meeting together, transact business by mail. The
    Secretary shall send out mail ballots on any question submitted by the Chair or by at
    least 1/5 of the members of the Committee. Fifteen days shall be allowed for the return of
    the votes cast, by mail, to the Secretary. The Secretary shall establish procedures for
    identifying voters in a mail ballot, and may accept votes through any mail system,
    including facsimile and electronic mail, for which such procedures have been established.
    Votes from alternate regional representatives will be counted, in accordance with the
    ranking procedure of the region, only if the regional representative fails to respond to the
    ballot. If, at the expiration of the applicable period, a quorum of the Committee have not
    returned their votes, the measure being voted upon shall be deemed to have failed; in all
    other cases, a majority of the votes returned shall carry the measure, except where a
    higher vote is required by the Bylaws. The Secretary shall preserve all such votes until
    the next meeting of the National Committee, at which meeting the Committee shall order
    the disposition of such votes.

  64. George Donnelly

    The Secretary is also supposed to maintain an archive of all these mail ballots and “supporting materials” but when I inquired with national HQ staff they knew nothing of this. When I emailed the secretary with a polite inquiry I received no response.

    Also, the agenda for a meeting is to be posted on lp.org 7 days or more before the meeting. Now less than 7 days remain before the next meeting and the agenda has not been posted.

    http://www.lp.org/lnc-meeting-archives

    We only have the agenda bc a rep leaked it.

  65. Steve M

    Brian,

    Just to rub it in, it seems to be you that has a miss-understanding of how parliamentary business may be conducted without a physical meeting.

    The Libertarian Party has a provision for it in its By-Laws and many states and municipalities have had to deal with how not to violate open meeting laws while debating issues via modern communication methods.

  66. BrianHoltz

    Steve, the only sunshine laws that apply to the LNC are the rules that we members have imposed on it through our bylaws. Your quote about email balloting only proves my point that the LNC cannot conduct “secret” business over email, since the bylaws require that all such email ballots be reported.

    I said nothing about entering executive session telepathically. Instead, I explained how RRONR requires that objections to entering executive session must be “timely”. In your eight comments to me since my explanation you have said precisely nothing to contradict that explanation of the timeliness requirement. Any lack of further response from me can be interpreted as me still waiting for you to contradict that explanation. Rub all you want.

  67. Steve M

    Brian,

    Would you agree that along with a vote there is discussion? Are you claiming that only the motions and the voting on the motions constitute conducting business.

    From http://www.robertsrules.org

    Provides common rules and procedures for deliberation and debate in order to place the whole membership on the same footing and speaking the same language. The conduct of ALL business is controlled by the general will of the whole membership – the right of the deliberate majority to decide. Complementary is the right of at least a strong minority to require the majority to be deliberate – to act according to its considered judgment AFTER a full and fair “working through” of the issues involved. Robert’s Rules provides for constructive and democratic meetings, to help, not hinder, the business of the assembly. Under no circumstances should “undue strictness” be allowed to intimidate members or limit full participation.

    Are you claiming that all we party members really deserve to view is the final motions and votes. If so why not hold almost all of the LNC meetings in an Executive Session stepping out only for final vote on the motions?

    When business (which includes the debate) is conducted on a closed email list this is essentially the same as holding meeting behind closed doors.

    Please, tell us Brian where did you get your definition of conducting business?

  68. Steve M

    Brian,

    I contend “The LNC may enter into Executive Session only in compliance with this policy.” trumps timeliness you contend it doesn’t.

    I grant, that the LNC might enter something called an executive session but that it isn’t the one put forth in the LNC policy manual and thus lacks the confidentiality protection and ability to punish a breach of such.

    If the board moves to declaire the moon made of cheese and no one objects that doesn’t make the moon a cheese ball.

  69. Steve M

    Brian,

    You have miss read this.

    “The only exceptions to the rule that a point of order must be made at the time of the breach arise in connection with breaches that are of a continuing nature, in which case a point of order can be made at any time during the continuance of the breach. Instances of this kind occur when:

    Is the expectation of confidentiality continuing?

    Clearly it is.

    (a) a main motion has been adopted that conflicts with the bylaws (or constitution) of the organization or assembly, unless the conflict is with a rule in the nature of a rule of order as described on p. 17 lines 23-24, in which case a point of order must be timely.”

    From Page 17 including lines 23-24

    Rules clearly identifiable as in the nature of rules of order that are placed within the the bylaws can also be suspended by a two-thirds vote; but, except for such rules and for clauses that provide for their own suspension, as stated above, bylaws cannot be suspended.

    RRONR finishes by stating

    “In all such cases, it is never too late to raise a point of order since the action so taken is null and void.”

    From page 17 RRONR

    Adoption or amendment of special rules of order that are separate from the bylaws requires either (a) previous notice (pp. 116-18) and a two-thirds vote or (b) a vote of a majority of the entire membership. After the bylaws of a society have been initially adopted when the organization is formed, the adoption or amendment of special rules of order placed within the bylaws is subject to the procedure for amending the bylaws (see 57).

    So the question is can during an LNC meeting the group amend the special rules without previous notice. Can the special rules be ignored if the result of ignoring them is of a continuing nature? If so can a point of order be raised at anytime?

    I think that, the special can be amended but wasn’t and therefor can not be ignored and thus the confidentiality portion of the in-correctly entered Executive Session can be set aside, held null and void)

  70. BrianHoltz

    Stephen, I contend that the rules about timeliness of objections are exactly as stated in RRONR, which describes exactly five classes of exceptions. I further contend that your argument doesn’t even have the correct shape to be valid if you don’t explain how entry into executive session fits into one of these five classes.

    Un-motioned entry into ES isn’t a “continuing breach”. The un-motioned entry into ES that you infer occurred last September is obviously not something that is continuing right now. Entry into ES is something that ends when the ES starts.

    I’m not at all creating an exception to the rules for entering ES. Rather, I’m explaining that the rules for entering ES fall into the default category for which objections have to be timely.

    If the LNC makes a motion to say X and nobody objects, then it remains a fact that the LNC said X, even if X is “the moon is made of cheese”.

    I know you don’t think LNC members share enough of the thinking and deliberations that go into their votes. I tend to agree. However, that still doesn’t mean that the LNC is taking any votes in secret, as you seemed to suggest earlier. I agree that deliberations are a part of business, but the private cognitive nature of deliberations is such that they can never be fully disclosed, whereas the crucial parts — the votes — are always fully disclosed.

  71. Steve M

    Brian,

    The continuing breach is the expectation of confidentiality and the protection from breach of that confidentiality for discussions that occurred in a executive session that had a non-valid entry.

    The question of debate centers around is a meeting occurring. If business is being conducted (including deliberation) and a quorum is present then it can be construed that a meeting is taking place. Even if that meeting is using phones or email. So the closed email list could constitute a meeting if a discussion is occurring about business that is before the LNC.

    Is it reasonable to expect that all LNC meetings be open to Libertarian Party Members, except for those that are in legal Executive Sessions?

  72. Michael H. Wilson

    So at this meeting where the LNC may have gone into executive session, or may not have, who was the parliamentarian responsible for seeing that the rules were followed? Anyone know?

    MHW

  73. BrianHoltz

    If “expectation of confidentiality” is the rule currently in breach, then Keaton is the one breaching it. You seem to have recanted your claim that the breached rule was the one about the requirements for entering executive session.

    Michael, the chair is ultimately responsible for enforcing the rules, even if there is an official parliamentarian present.

  74. Steve M

    Brian,

    Brian,

    No, I haven’t changed my position at all. I believe I have used the word breach with respect to confidentiality through out this discussion.

    Where the board made its mistake was in how it entered the executive session. The cost of that mistake is the loss of the continuing protection against breach of confidentiality.

    A legally entered Executive Session provides the ability to shift the liability over to the breaching member. And gives cause to to suspend the member of the breaching member.

    By not having entered into the executive session with a proper motion, a second and a vote the expectation of that protection against breach is lost.

    The executive session makes that confidentiality continuing and a challenge to that executive session would terminate that protection.

  75. Steve M

    Michael,

    I understand that my concern about how executive sessions are entered into is being discussed on that “secret” email list.

    Hopefully, they have a real parliamentarian to help sort out this issue. Also, hopefully they have consulted their lawyer for a legal opinion on dangers this issue is.

  76. Michael H. Wilson

    Brian I am well aware that “the chair is ultimately responsible for enforcing the rules”.

    My question still is “who was the parliamentarian responsible for seeing that the rules were followed”?

    Maybe there wasn’t anyone, but there should be given the nature of the business and the responsibilities that the Chair has at one of these meetings. Let’s give that person, the Chair, some help.

    In the meantime was there anyone acting in that capacity?

    MHW who has been a state Chair and put up with all the nonsense and squabbling.

  77. JimDavidson

    Funny you should mention their lawyer. He’s raising his fees, again, because he thinks the way the LNC has been behaving may be increasing his liability for the work he’s doing.

  78. Steve M

    Jim,

    I had noticed. But, as I understand his issue is because he isn’t consulted before actions are taken. This is one reason he should be consulted before next weekend.

  79. Steve M

    Michael,

    My letter was an open letter and it was sent to every member of the LNC and every alternate. If the email bounced, I tried again. I am pretty sure that every one got the initial letter. I am, reasonably sure that this issue has been presented to the board via that mailing list.

    Beyond that I trust that this group is competent enough to seek the right help in getting past this issue.

    They only real question is one of egos. If it isn’t obvious Brian and Mine clash (at least at times) getting past a groups egos might be hard.

    Brian has suggested that Angela apologize. From a politic stance, this is a good idea. Not publicly, Angela and Arron Starr should come to terms where the action against her is struck from the agenda and she assures the others that if an executive session is entered legally she will abide or leave the session.

    Remember, that what is discussed can be entered into the public record if all members in the executive session agree.

    I would find it hard to believe that any member or the Barr/Root campaign would complain if Angela herself didn’t for this instance.

  80. starchild

    I think all this legalism risks missing the bigger picture, which is that we need LNC members who believe in a strongly libertarian Libertarian Party. By that standard, Angela Keaton appears to be one of the better representatives we have. What kind of LP members care more about whether the contents of a secret meeting are revealed, than whether our representatives proudly stand for libertarianism?

    “To the bureaucratic mind, when the rules conflict with reality, the rules take precedence.”

  81. Steve M

    Good morning Starchild.

    Are you familiar withe Buchanan corollary to Murphy’s law?

    Any enforcement of a regulation by a bureaucrat will be done in such a manner as to violate the law that created the regulation in the first place.

    I would argue that I am not missing the big picture. the big picture involves the survival of the party so that it continues to exist. The liability exposure for a breach of confidentiality is huge.

    And while I absolutely agree with you that bringing in high spirited individuals such as Angels is a major plus for the party we owe it to them to educate them and protect them and protect the party all at the same time.

    Thanks for your sig on the poster at the Alameda Libertarian Wine thing back in October.

    I am going to give it to my Democratic Mom (for xmas) and remind her that she watched you (on cspan) at the Lib Convention.

    Does the Saturn restaurant still exist down in Santa Cruz? If so if you see a button on their wall that reads Tennessee Democrats for Choice it is hers.

  82. Michael H. Wilson

    Steve thanks for your work on this problem and Starchild thank you for the letter you wrote to the LNC members. Let’s hope they can get beyond this without ripping at the fabric of the party.

    Thanks again guys,

    MHW

  83. VirtualGalt

    I agree with Starchild insofar as we should *want* visible spokespeople and leaders in the LP who really believe in liberty.

    However, when a person agrees to serve on the national committee, I think it’s OK for the LNC as a body to have some baseline expectation that the person will work within the system. That doesn’t include calling the party “hopeless”; that doesn’t include promoting the interests of a competing organization; and it doesn’t include deciding for yourself what is an executive session and what is not.

  84. George Phillies

    I am assured — but I was not there — that the party’s attorney had indicated the opinion that Keaton had not breached the confidentiality rules, because she had revealed what was said about her.

  85. BrianHoltz

    Michael, I’m very confident there was nobody acting in an official capacity there as parliamentarian. However, we know there were quite a few registered parliamentarians in the room: Carling, Moulton, Mattson, and I think Karlan too.

    The last time that I know of when Redpath had a professional parliamentarian beside him acting in an official capacity, the body in question summarily overruled Redpath’s attempt to follow the parliamentarian’s guidance on the one substantive question that was put to her. This was in Denver, and the question was whether Bylaw 14.2 secretly means “Articles 4.1 and 14.2 shall not be amended…” where it says “Article 4.1 shall not be amended…” The delegates chose tyranny of the 51% (i.e. mob rule) over the principle that people are bound by the plain text of the agreements they enter into. The parliamentarian was apparently quite shocked and appalled at how her guidance was loudly ignored.

  86. José C

    However, when a person agrees to serve on the national committee, I think it’s OK for the LNC as a body to have some baseline expectation that the person will work within the system. That doesn’t include calling the party “hopeless”; that doesn’t include promoting the interests of a competing organization; and it doesn’t include deciding for yourself what is an executive session and what is not.

    I agree. And it does not include doing things to hurt the campaign for President of the nominee of the Party of which you are a member of the national committee.

    She had a moral (and legal) obligation as a member of the national committee to support Bob Barr. If she was not able to support the nominee she should not have served on the LNC.

    In the future we should ask those seeking to serve on the LNC if they promise to support the nominee for President whoever that person may be. If the answer is no they should not get our vote and they should not serve.

  87. JimDavidson

    “She had a moral (and legal) obligation as a member of the national committee to support Bob Barr.”

    I certainly disagree with any moral obligation to hold a personal opinion. Libertarians ought to understand the individual right to freedom of choice, freedom of expression, and freedom of association. I think it is completely legitimate for the members of the Denver convention to choose a delegate to the LNC who opposed the presidential nominee during the entire primary and campaign season, which they did do.

    If Jose C nows of some legal obligation to support the nominee of the party, I’d like to see the law. I dispute this law’s existence. Moreover, since any such law would be an affront to free expression and free association, I dispute the theoretical law’s constitutionality. Moreover, as a mala prohibitum, it would be just another stupid law.

    Jose C is the sort who likes to force other people to do what he wants. He would like to imagine a federal elections commission strong enough to rape or kill Angela Keaton for daring to oppose the LP convention’s presidential nominee, I think.

  88. BrianHoltz

    Jose makes a good point. Bylaw 12.4 says “The National Committee shall respect the vote of the delegates at Nominating Conventions and provide full support for all nominees for President and Vice-President as long as their campaigns are conducted in accordance with the Platform of the Party.” This would arguably be a joint and several obligation.

  89. TheOriginalAndy

    “BrianHoltz // Dec 1, 2008 at 1:03 am

    Jose makes a good point. Bylaw 12.4 says “The National Committee shall respect the vote of the delegates at Nominating Conventions and provide full support for all nominees for President and Vice-President as long as their campaigns are conducted in accordance with the Platform of the Party.” This would arguably be a joint and several obligation.”

    I think that one could make a reasonable arguement that the Barr campaign was not conducted in accordance to the Platform of the Party, and I say this as a person who does NOT support Angela Keaton either.

  90. TheOriginalAndy

    “By that standard, Angela Keaton appears to be one of the better representatives we have. ”

    “Appears to be” are the key words. Appearances can be decieving. I got duped into voting for Keaton at the National Convention, but later I found out that she’s a liar and a backstabbing phony and a defender of the incompetent and corrupt Sean Haugh.

    I agree with Mary Ruwart that Angela Keaton should not be on the LNC.

  91. Steve M

    Angela Keaton represents a certain group of people who are member of the Libertarian Party. Does this group not deserve representation?

    The place to settle this issue is at the next convention.

    Let the party delegates decide and not the bloggers or the other members of the LNC.

  92. TheOriginalAndy

    “107 Steve M // Dec 1, 2008 at 1:53 am

    Angela Keaton represents a certain group of people who are member of the Libertarian Party. Does this group not deserve representation?”

    You must mean the lying, backstabbing, false-accusations-of-crime accusing, phony, cover-up artist for the incompetent and corrupt Sean Haugh, delusional whackjob faction of the LP.

    It is about damn time that the fraud that is Angela Keaton get exposed and put in her place. She serves no useful purpose. There are plenty of people on this very forum who could do a better job on the LNC.

    I bought into Angela’s “act” at one time myself, so spare me the bullshit about how great she is.

    “The place to settle this issue is at the next convention.

    Let the party delegates decide and not the bloggers or the other members of the LNC.”

    This reminds me of the Democrats in California who opposed the Grey Davis Recall, or of the Republicans around the country who oppose impeaching Bush.

    I’m all in favor of removing people from office who abuse their position and engage in unethical behavior.

    It would be great to see Angela get “impeached” and removed from office, and then to see that jackass Sean Haugh fired, and the same thing goes with a few other people.

  93. Steve M

    Andy,

    You are behaving as an idiot and a fool.

    I mean the 13% of the delegates vote, giving her the fourth highest vote count in the election of at large LNC Member.

    That you would strip the delegates that she represents of their representation.

    Steve Meier

  94. BrianHoltz

    OriginalAndy, in what sense was the Barr campaign not conducted in accordance with the Platform? Which plank(s) were violated, and by what statements or actions of the campaign?

  95. JimDavidson

    @104-105 I would be curious where the LP platform calls for intervening in Colombia to fight the drug war, as Barr indicated would be a direction he’d take foreign policy. I would be curious how the LP platform is consistent with the Barr policy to use the military in Afghanistan “much more wisely.” This point of his campaign was very much in contrast to the LNC’s resolution calling for the immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan – passed at their September meeting though not announced for many days thereafter.

    I wonder if gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered libertarians think Barr’s campaign was consistent with the party platform on issues of particular concern to them. His statements at this link:
    http://glassbooth.org/explore/index/bob-barr/19/gay-rights/15/

    defend his Defense of Marriage Act, and the notion that the several states should have power to restrict activities by people on account of their sexual preferences. I believe his statements are not consistent with LP platform 1.3 on personal relationships – which applies to both state and national government.

    Barr campaigned on the fact that he voted for the USAPATRIOT act and continues to support parts of it. I’m not sure which parts, but they seem likely to conflict with sundry provisions of the LP platform.

    Barr’s position on abortion seems to call for government action in this area, which is inconsistent with the LP platform.

    I believe Barr campaigned on his record on the gun control issue, which record included his vote for background checks at gun shows and for the Lautenberg amendment, both of which are clearly in opposition to the LP platform on this matter.

    His positions on religion, opposing the separation of church and state, supporting government funding of faith based initiatives, supporting faith based groups with federal funds using religious tests in hiring, and supporting government funding for the display of the ten commandments on public property all seem to be in direct contrast to the LP platform on these matters.

    Barr strongly supports increased funding for NASA, something of a pet peeve of my own. I think such funding is badly wasted and extremely deleterious to the private development of space tourism and other private space projects.

    In short, it appears that Barr did not run a campaign at all consistent with the platform, nor with the express wishes of the LNC on the topic of Afghanistan in particular.

    I’m not clear how wearing a Boston Tea Party tank top t-shirt constitutes campaigning against Barr. It isn’t like she was wearing a Jay-Knapp campaign button. (We didn’t get one to her in time.)

  96. TheOriginalAndy

    “109 Steve M // Dec 1, 2008 at 3:18 am

    Andy,

    You are behaving as an idiot and a fool.

    I mean the 13% of the delegates vote, giving her the fourth highest vote count in the election of at large LNC Member.

    That you would strip the delegates that she represents of their representation.

    Steve Meier”

    So what if she got the 4th highest number of votes. Grey Davis got the highest number of votes in the Governor’s race in California in 2002, so should he have not been recalled from office in 2003?

    If a person abuses their position they should be held accountable. I voted for Angela Keaton but at the time I did not know what she was really like as I bought into her facade. After I got my “rude awakening” as to the TRUE nature of Angela Keaton (a liar, a backstabber, and a nutcase) I stopped supporting her and am now calling for her removal from office.

    I hate to be the bearer of bad news as apparently she’s got a lot of you people fooled (just as I was at one time), but Angela Keaton is not what she appears to be. I suppose that some people have to get bitten by a rattlesnake before they will acknowledge that they are dangerous.

  97. TheOriginalAndy

    “BrianHoltz // Dec 1, 2008 at 4:01 am

    OriginalAndy, in what sense was the Barr campaign not conducted in accordance with the Platform? Which plank(s) were violated, and by what statements or actions of the campaign?”

    In addition to what Jim Davidson said in post #111, in an appearance on Hannity & Colmes, Sean Hannity asked Bob Barr about the War on Drugs. Barr said that he opposes the federal War on Drugs (which is good), but then Hannity pressed him further about the War on Drugs at the state level and he asked Barr if he would support drug legalization in his home state of Georgia. Bob Barr said no. This is not what I’d call a Libertarian anwser to the question. Barr could have said something like, “Sean, I’m running for President and as President I would end the federal government’s War on Drugs. As President I don’t have any control over what the state government of Georgia does in regard to this issue, but I would urge the state government in Georgia to call off the drug war as well. The War on Drugs is a failure and is a a gross violation of individual rights. I do not support it at the federal level or at the state level.”

    Barr called for more government intervention to rescue Fannie Mae.

    Barr said that he was going to attend the Ron Paul 3rd party press conference and then backed out of it at the last minute and embarrassed the party and pissed off many Ron Paul supporters (which cost the party votes).

    From what I’ve heard, Barr’s campaign defrauded Libertarian petitioner Angelia O’Dell (who is also the State Chair of the Oklahoma LP) out of pay that she is owed for ballot access petitioning in West Virginia. I know that his campaign attempted to defraud Libertarian petitioner Jake Witmer out of his pay for ballot access petitioning as well, but after Jake hired a lawyer and then got Bill Redpath to pressure them to pay him, they finally did, but even then they still stiffed him out of $900 which he will likely never see. I’m not saying that Bob Barr himself is directly responsible for this, but people that he surrounds himself are, so since we are talking about his campaign, and since his campaign includes more than just him, I think that it is relavent.

  98. Steve M

    Andy,

    You are behaving as an idiot and a fool in the sense that you think you have some innate right to strip other factions of this party of their elected representation.

    You are behaving as an idiot and a fool in that you now know Angela Keaton’s true nature now.

    So you have buyers remorse, what right does that give you to impose your change of heart on others?

    So you are not happy, fine, you voted for her, fine. The place to correct this is in a democratic vote under the bylaws of the party. We do this at a convention and not through a coup!

    Welcome to a democratically run party!

  99. Steve M

    Jim Davidson,

    NASA stands for National Air and Space Administration. The space part is what most of us associate NASA with. But in reality the Air part is what we mostly have use of. One of NASA’s tasks is improving the routing and density of aircraft. Certainly an issue of interstate commerce.

    Are you opposed to this function of NASA?

  100. TheOriginalAndy

    “Steve M // Dec 1, 2008 at 4:42 am

    Andy,

    You are behaving as an idiot and a fool in the sense that you think you have some innate right to strip other factions of this party of their elected representation.

    You are behaving as an idiot and a fool in that you now know Angela Keaton’s true nature now.

    So you have buyers remorse, what right does that give you to impose your change of heart on others?”

    Angela Keaton INITIATED FRAUD by falsely accusing myself and another guy of crimes. She did this because we were acting as whistle blowers in regard to the corruption of LP Political Director, Sean Haugh.

    The INITIATION OF FRAUD is a violation of Libertarian principles, and covering up for the corrupt asshole Sean Haugh is detrimental to the party (Haugh squandered thousands upon thousands of Libertarian Party donors money, played a direct role in causing 5 LP ballot access FAILURES this year, illegally tried to “burn (quite literally)” 2,000 high validity LP ballot access petition signatures in Massachusetts “whether they had been paid for or not” in an act vindictiveness against a Libertarian petition circulator who had done nothing to him, and was the co-author of the infamous “kiddie porn” press release along with Shane Cory that was meant to smear Mary Ruwart) and I would label covering up for this SLIMEBALL to be a violation of Libertarian principles as well.

    Angela Keaton also abused her position by attempting to blackball Paul – whom she had previously pretended to be a friend of – from working on LP ballot access petitions for the “offense” of pointing out that the accusations that Angeal had posted on-line about myself and another guy were false.

    Angela has INITIATED FRAUD and abused her position in the party and deserves to be removed from office.

  101. TheOriginalAndy

    “116 Steve M // Dec 1, 2008 at 4:56 am

    Jim Davidson,

    NASA stands for National Air and Space Administration. The space part is what most of us associate NASA with. But in reality the Air part is what we mostly have use of. One of NASA’s tasks is improving the routing and density of aircraft. Certainly an issue of interstate commerce.”

    Wow, talk about stretching the interstate commerce!

  102. Steve M

    Andy,

    Was the Libertarian Ballot access run competently? I have no idea, and if it wasn’t to which rule in the bylaws or which special rule do you claim gives the LNC the power to strip Angela of her elected position?

    If Angela has defamed an individual, the united states has laws protecting against such defamation the offended parties should make use of these laws.

    The bloggs are full of nasty accusations with little substance and for you to think that your injecting more slime onto the bloggs justifies the disenfranchising an elected representative to the party central committee well did I mention that that is the act of a fool.

    If you have proof that Angela or any other member of the party has engaged in a fraud with actually damaged victims and these victims agree then you and they should be putting together a legal action rather then engaging in more character assassination.

    Until then I stand with my opinion that you are acting as an idiot and a fool!

  103. Steve M

    Andy,

    I would love to here how you think airplanes should be routed across the united states such that we maintain the current traffic density and safety let alone increase the density. Do you do anything constructive?

  104. cbennett

    I would pay Andy $100 dollars to STFU about his discontent with Angela Keaton. It’s getting old quick. Get a life already!

  105. Steve M

    George,

    I brought this up because it is a little understood function of NASA. That is working to build the next generation of air traffic management. This is an area where you probably don’t want a bunch of competing solutions.

    Andy, was questioning that air traffic management wasn’t interstate commerce. Well if a bunch of jets loaded with people fairing them between cities crossing state boarders at 500 MHP isn’t interstate commerce then nothing is.

    How about if it funded by user fees? Or should we not have this function and just let the system…

    CRASH?

  106. George Donnelly

    Steve, while I appreciate your analysis above, I think it’s a red herring to say that if we don’t have one system for something like air-traffic control, pushed down on the people from above and funded via extortion that therefore the planes or the ATC system will crash.

    I won’t say anything else bc I don’t want to get off topic or detract from your open letter.

  107. paulie cannoli Post author

    Kate O’Brien:

    What, exactly, did Angela do?

    If she blabbed the minutes from an Executive Session, she should probably apologize.

    If what she blabbed can be shown to have damaged the party business in any way, she should probably be censured (depending, of course, on how bad the damage is). There IS a reason Boards call Executive Sessions, after all.

    If this really is all about her dumping Aaron, then perhaps he should get the Policy Manual amended so that dumping the LNC Treasurer romantically is listed as a cause for removal from the LNC. There is a reason that Boards have policy manuals, too.

    Ms. O’Brien was Aaron Starr’s long time girlfriend until she caught him with her then friend Angela Keaton (according to Kate O’Brien).

  108. TheOriginalAndy

    “cbennett // Dec 1, 2008 at 10:22 am

    I would pay Andy $100 dollars to STFU about his discontent with Angela Keaton. It’s getting old quick. Get a life already!”

    Why is it OK for people to talk about their discontent with other people but not OK to talk about discontent with Angela Keaton?

    So Angela can spread lies about people and it is OK and nobody is supposed to call her out on it.

    You KNEW that I was disgusted with Angela Keaton months ago. If Angela Keaton did to you what she did to us (Gary, Paul, and I) then I’d be willing to bet that you’d be disgusted with her as well.

    There are plenty of people here who could take her place on the LNC and do a better job, including YOU!

  109. TheOriginalAndy

    “Steve M // Dec 1, 2008 at 5:19 am

    Andy,

    Was the Libertarian Ballot access run competently? I have no idea, and if it wasn’t to which rule in the bylaws or which special rule do you claim gives the LNC the power to strip Angela of her elected position?”

    You have “no idea” if Libertarian Party ballot access was run competently. Well let’s see, this year the Libertarian Party FAILED to get on the ballot in West Virginia, Connecticut, Maine, Washington DC, and Louisiana. After their ballot access petitioning efforts failed there, they filed law suits in West Virginia, Connecticut, Maine, and Louisiana, and these law suits were a FAILURE as well (just as I had predicted). These are all places where they usually make it on the ballot, and in fact were on the ballot in the 2004 election. Don’t you see a pattern here?

    I am willing to give them a “pass” for failing in Oklahoma, because if they wanted to make it on the ballot in Oklahoma this year they should have started petitioning there by September of 2007, but instead of doing that they decided to back a ballot initiative (in conjuction with the Green Party and the Constitution Party) that would have reduced the signature requirment for ballot access for minor party and independent candidates. I say “would have” because they failed to get enough signatures to put the initiative on the ballot.

    Unless the Libertarian Party was able to get Ron Paul or a mega-wealthy candidate, there was no way they were going to make it on the ballot in Oklahoma this year.

    However, the ballot access failures in West Virginia, Connecticut, Maine, Washigton DC, and Louisiana were all avoidable and failing in these places was inexcusable.

  110. TheOriginalAndy

    “If Angela has defamed an individual, the united states has laws protecting against such defamation the offended parties should make use of these laws.”

    No, can’t do that because it violates Libertarian principles. Nevermind the fact that what Keaton did went beyond mere name calling. It is OK to falsely accuse people of crimes. Falsely accusing people of crimes is “free speech,” so what if faslely accusing people of crimes can petentially lead to people being falsely arrested or harrassed by the police.

    If somebody is a whistle blower about corruption, just make up that they committed a crime. That’s a good way to shut them up. This is the Angela Keaton way. Silence the enemies of your friends by falsely accusing them of crimes!

  111. TheOriginalAndy

    “Ms. O’Brien was Aaron Starr’s long time girlfriend until she caught him with her then friend Angela Keaton (according to Kate O’Brien).”

    Wow, it sounds like Angela Keaton has a history of backstabbing!

  112. G.E.

    Angela Keaton INITIATED FRAUD

    Not according to Murray Rothbard or Walter Block. Just according to you and Newt Gingrich.

    Angela Keaton did not violate a contract. Violation of a contract is required for fraud.

    Angela Keaton was a meanie. That’s not yet a crime, but maybe it will be under Obama. Stop whining about it.

  113. TheOriginalAndy

    “Angela Keaton did not violate a contract. Violation of a contract is required for fraud.”

    GE, are you not familiar with the oath that Libertarians sign about not initiating force. Angela Keaton violated Libertarian principles and should be removed from office.

    This is NOT a simple case of name calling, it is the initiation of fraudulent chares of crime and abuse of a position of power in the party, in addition to covering up the crimes of the Political Director, Sean Haugh, who himself initiated force & fraud.

  114. TheOriginalAndy

    “G.E. // Dec 1, 2008 at 8:27 pm

    “Defamation” is a statist non-crime.

    Give this up, Andy.”

    This is NOT about defamation as a crime and NEVER was! Falsely accusing people of crimes is NOT the same thing as defamation. CAN’T YOU SEE THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE?!?!?

    If somebody says that GE is a jerk then that is defemation. Feelings may be hurt but that’s about it. If somebody says that GE raped his daughter, and if word of this got to the police or to Child Protective Services, GE would get taken away in handcuffs and would lose custody of his daughter. Even if the accusation never got as far as police or Child Protective Services involvement, the fact that the accusation was put out there could POTENTIALLY lead to that.

    Let’s say that somebody did put out the rumor that GE raped his daughter, and let’s say that it did lead to the involvement of the police and/or Child Protective Services, I wonder if he would still consider it to be a simple case of “defamation” which is not a libertarian crime.

    The fact that Angela Keaton uses that tactic of silencing critics of her cronies by accusing the critics of being criminals speaks VOLUMES about her lack of ethics.

    Keaton obviously believes that it is OK to violate her contract as a Libertarian Party member by initiating fraud to achieve her political goal of keeping that slimeball parasite Sean Haugh employeed as Political Director.

  115. TheOriginalAndy

    Another thing that I’d like to point out is that REAL Libertarians are anti-force & fruad BEFORE they are anti-government.

    The only reason for Libertarians to be anti-government is because governments tend to be the biggest purveyors of the initiation of force & fraud, but this doesn’t mean that a person who is not “officially” a “government” is excused if they initiate force or fraud.

  116. Michael Seebeck

    To answer my own question @65, the Hotel does have WiFi for $9.95, so a remote webcast is extremely possible.

  117. G.E.

    Fraud pertains to contracts and obligations, Andy.

    If A.K. accuses you of a crime, and then authorities respond, then she has initiated force against you. That has nothing to do with fraud. She would have engaged the police as her agent to initiate force against you.

    Has this happened? Have the police come after you? Has she reported you or Gary to the police?

    If she did report the police on you, then it would be the police’s job to determine whether or not her claims were worth of pursuing. If she lied, then she would have committed fraud AGAINST the police, not against you. She would have been entering into a contractual arrangement with the police, whereby it is contractually assumed that she is making claims in good faith.

  118. G.E.

    Even if the accusation never got as far as police or Child Protective Services involvement, the fact that the accusation was put out there could POTENTIALLY lead to that.

    Me farting could eventually lead to a hurricane.

    Should the people of New Orleans be able to sue me when I eat a burrito?

    WEAK logic.

  119. JimDavidson

    @150 “Out the window, Babu!” – Sean Connery in “The Man Who Would Be King.”

  120. LibertarianGirl

    Ill be there , videotaping , blogging and taking pics , I may even put my phone on speaker and call someone as well as record it on a handheld audio recorder .
    Just kidding…
    but only about the pics and cellphone
    see ya there

  121. TheOriginalAndy

    “157 G.E. // Dec 1, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    Fraud pertains to contracts and obligations, Andy.”

    Here is the dictionary definition of fraud.

    fraud

    noun
    1. intentional deception resulting in injury to another person
    2. a person who makes deceitful pretenses
    3. something intended to deceive; deliberate trickery intended to gain an advantage

    “If A.K. accuses you of a crime, and then authorities respond, then she has initiated force against you. That has nothing to do with fraud. She would have engaged the police as her agent to initiate force against you.

    Has this happened? Have the police come after you? Has she reported you or Gary to the police?”

    As of this moment, the police have not come after anybody, however, this is NOT the point as I am talking about the PRINCIPLE. The fact of the matter is that Angela Keaton obviously has no problem with lying about people – including making false criminal accusations about people – for her own gain, which in this case is so the incompetent cretin Sean Haugh can keep his job as Political Director.

    The fact that Keaton is willing to lie about people – the worst of which are false accusations of crimes – who expose the corruption of one of her cronies is a violation of Libertarian prinicples and is an abuse of her position on the LNC. Such behavior is destructive to the party.

  122. TheOriginalAndy

    “158 G.E. // Dec 1, 2008 at 9:40 pm

    Even if the accusation never got as far as police or Child Protective Services involvement, the fact that the accusation was put out there could POTENTIALLY lead to that.

    Me farting could eventually lead to a hurricane.

    Should the people of New Orleans be able to sue me when I eat a burrito?”

    Once again you are talking as if somebody has a law suit against Angela Keaton WHEN THERE IS NO LAW SUIT AGAINST ANGELA KEATON. ONCE AGAIN, THERE IS NO LAW SUIT AGAINST ANGELA KEATON.

    The point which I have been driving at over and over is that Angela Keaton should not be on the LNC because she has obvious ethical problems and is mentally unstable. The opinion that Angela Keaton should not be on the LNC also happens to be held by Mary Ruwart.

  123. G.E.

    The point which I have been driving at over and over is that Angela Keaton should not be on the LNC because she has obvious ethical problems and is mentally unstable.

    Fine. That’s a valid opinion.

    But you’re ducking and weaving. The dictionary definition means nothing. In libertarian terms, fraud refers to something very specific, and “making false accusations” does not meet that definition.

    Again, if she reported to the police, then she would be defrauding the police (and maybe you). If the police acted and injured you, then they (and probably A.K.) would be aggressors. But your “slippery slope” argument is not libertarian. I could do any number of things right now that could end up with some person I’ve never met being thrown in jail for a crime he didn’t commit. I just turned my lights on and off again 100 times. Who knows what the butterfly effect of that action could be? The fact is I haven’t committed aggression, and neither has A.K. Whether or nor her conduct was ethical, etc., is a legitimate point of contention, and I have said time and time again that you and Gary have justification in your anger. But Gary’s incessant hollow threats to use the armed force of the state is both lame and unlibertarian.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *