Alicia Mattson: Application to Fill LNC Secretary Vacancy

The LNC has received another application for the secretary position

 

LNC Members and Alternates,

I am writing regarding the vacancy in the position of LNC Secretary to confirm that I am a candidate for that position, and I ask for your support.

There are positions on the LNC where a member can be a bump on a log. The Secretary position is not one of them, and this LNC has experienced how important it is for the Secretary’s job to be done well.

The LNC has already lost too much valuable time being hamstrung by administrative problems. You now need a Secretary that you know will get the job done so that the LNC can focus on its own job for the rest of the term.

I am a known quantity when it comes to performing in this position. You don’t have to guess whether or not you think I can do the job. I need no time to get up to speed and figure the job out.

There is a large backlog of Secretarial work. I know that the pro tem Secretary will make as much progress as he can on this problem. If I am elected Secretary, I will commit to finishing whatever is left in as short a time frame as is feasible.

My track record from performance as Secretary last term speaks for itself.

• As LNC Secretary last term, I submitted draft minutes and updated drafts on time. For the minutes I produced last term, my average time for submitting the first draft was 3.4 days. My submission average drops to 2.9 days if you ignore the anomaly when I contracted a very nasty case of viral pneumonia (and hives from an allergic reaction to the virus itself) during an LNC meeting trip. It took me 13 days to submit draft minutes under those dire conditions.

• Though I am human and will make mistakes at times, for me high accuracy is the rule, rather than the exception. In processing the 45 mail ballots from last term, with up to 7 motions simultaneously at times, I believe I only overlooked 2 individual votes out of close to 700 total email votes cast. I promptly issued corrected results when the problems were pointed out.

• Because of my reliability in producing timely and accurate minutes, the LNC last term was able to significantly shorten the process for auto-approving minutes so that they could be made available to the membership sooner.

• As LNC Secretary, I communicated with the LNC about the status of my job. I gave advance warning when I expected to be unavailable for a period of time that could interfere with my job. I cleared up questions about how to count people’s votes before the end of the voting period so there was no reasonable doubt left. Approved minutes were promptly posted to the website.

In addition to the duties inherent to the office of Secretary, last term I served on several committees that also required non-trivial amounts of work. I served on the APRC and the Convention Oversight Committee. At the request of the LNC, I constructed an archive of our affiliates’ bylaws. When the LNC felt it needed more information about real estate options for our national headquarters, I spent a week in the D.C. area on a property search and was able to bring back to the LNC some viable alternatives. Following the 2012 convention, I continued to work as needed with Bob Johnston and others to see that ballot access paperwork was submitted on time for our Presidential ticket.

I’m a hard worker who gets the job done even under time constraints and difficult circumstances.

I’m a Life Member of the LP and have served in a large number of local, state, and national party positions giving me a broad-spectrum perspective of the inner workings of the party.

I am a Professional Registered Parliamentarian, and I actively use my certification doing paid contract work for non-LP clients.

I have a B.S. degree in Computer Science and an MBA degree, have worked as a computer programmer and tech support in a corporate IT department, and have run a successful small business.

Years ago, I created membership data management software for state affiliates to help them make use of the monthly data dumps they receive from the national party. I have provided this software free-of-charge to 16 affiliates over the years. It may have this been this that led Chuck Moulton to appoint me to the LNC’s IT Committee in 2007.

I have the organizational and technical skills that the job demands. I received great job reviews from the last time I served in this position. I am well aware that this job requires a substantial time commitment, and I’m ready to put my skills to use and serve the LNC again in this capacity.

Thank you for your consideration,

Alicia Mattson

104 thoughts on “Alicia Mattson: Application to Fill LNC Secretary Vacancy

  1. Wes Wagner

    I can almost guaranteed that if this happened, Oregon secession would be on the next agenda, and it would pass even if I voted “no”.

  2. givemeliberty

    What’s the story with Mattson and all the negative hype associated with her? Can anyone give me a history lesson?

  3. Stewart Flood

    The history is complex.

    As far as the technical duties of the office of secretary, Ms Mattson is clearly qualified. I do not believe that anyone in favor of electing her to this position or anyone opposed to her election can find fault with her ability to do the job.

    But then there’s the “inner circle” and her strict adherence to their agenda during the last term. Politically, she made a lot of enemies.

    Electing her would give Mr Starr a significant advantage in his efforts to control the actions of the committee. Unlike some LNC members under his influence, she does not require notes on cards to be placed in front of her.

    Of course there is no absolute dividing line on issues facing the LNC. But the position of secretary was taken away from her at the convention based on her voting record and support of a specific faction’s agenda. Electing her would be an act in direct opposition to the convention delegates’ wishes.

    Ms Mattson is certainly dedicated and obviously qualified. But she is the wrong candidate for the position. Mr Blau and Mr Moulton are both qualified and able candidates. Neither is under the control of any specific faction.

  4. Oranje Mike

    She did one hell of a job at the convention. I had a front row seat in Vegas. Honestly, if I had been secretary, I would have quit on the spot. But the rank-and-file of the LP spoke loud and clear. There was a core group the rank-and-file wanted gone and the rank-and-file held their ground and won. It would be a slap in the face to bring the same people back into the fold and it could cost the LP some dues paying members.

  5. Red Solo Cup

    @2,

    Every day since the end of the Mayan calendar, she has sacrificed a baby goat wearing a Teletubbies costume.

    She is the reincarnation of Mussolini’s wife’s third cousin, once removed.

    She was born with a sixth toe on her left foot, but she refused to even donate it to a homeless child that had been born missing one toe.

  6. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    A normal person, one with a decent amount of both pride and shame, would, after being voted out so recently by the delegates, refrain from trying to bypass their decision and try to get follow site use viagra who go here follow site write a good essayВ source site transgender pronouns academic papers how to write a scholarship essay on leadership population english essay good dissertation topics cheap lasix online no prescription blake snyder thesis antithesis synthesis consequences du viagra doctoral thesis proposal examples growing up essay best custom essay service best dissertation results writing for hire for phd go here https://www.nypre.com/programs/help-in-writing-essays/37/ https://goodsamatlanta.org/patients/where-to-buy-viagra-in-myanmar/01/ case studies in business statistics get link adhd and homework help buy essay club free clothing line business plan template buy viagra per pill ge n eric viagra https://scfcs.scf.edu/review/good-articles-to-write-about-for-school/22/ see url here viagra patent expire date canada http://www.cresthavenacademy.org/chapter/topic-questions-for-essays/26/ appointed back onto the LNC.

    But her behavior is typical of the Root/Starr clique’s shameless grasping after titles, offices, and petty power.

    It’s like Root/Starr’s founding of the LNCC as a way to bypass the delegates’ increasing disfavor with them both.

    What did Mattson ever do wrong? How about her biased push-polling when she emailed (and wrote, I believe) that questionnaire on the proposed platform changes for the 2006 national convention?

  7. George Phillies

    However, her presence as a candidate suggests that her friends have counted noses and think they have the votes. Alternatively, she is the beautiful magician’s assistant there to distract the rubes so that the acceptable alternative can be put into place without objection or people noting that he is their actual choice.

  8. Rs & Ds for Unity

    Unfortunately, the policies of division are not the fault of any particular person, but that of the mechanics and psychology of plurality voting.

  9. Scott Lieberman

    I am going to compare the percentage of the votes that Mark Hinkle got for LNC At-Large in Las Vegas in 2012 vs. the highest vote getter for LNC At-Large; and do the same same comparison for Alicia Mattson vs. Ruth Bennett for LNC Secy. I think that is the most reasonable way to compare a multi-winner election with a single-winner election.

    Mark Hinkle got 55% of the number of votes that Bill Redpath got

    Alicia Mattson got 76% of the number of votes that Ruth Bennett got

    Remember, the Delegates **could** vote for Hinkle AND Redpath, but they could not vote for Mattson AND Bennett.

    It is clear that Ms. Mattson had more support amongst the Delegates for Secretary, than Mark Hinkle did for LNC At-Large. And remember that late last year the LNC elected Mark Hinkle to fill the LNC At-Large vacancy created by Wayne Root’s resignation.

    If anyone wants to check my work, just look up the vote totals on http://www.LP.org

  10. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I don’t know Alicia and I’m sure she did a fine job previously as secretary, but we had other fine candidates who have not been known to “takes sides”. I would urge the LNC to bring in one of those gentlemen.

  11. Chuck Moulton

    Alicia Mattson wrote (in the article):

    Years ago, I created membership data management software for state affiliates to help them make use of the monthly data dumps they receive from the national party. I have provided this software free-of-charge to 16 affiliates over the years. It may have this been this that led Chuck Moulton to appoint me to the LNC’s IT Committee in 2007.

    Virginia uses Alicia Mattson’s Lp-Data program for our state database. It made our database administrator’s job much easier.

  12. Stewart Flood

    Dr Lieberman is correct regarding the percentages of candidates, however he is trying to mix a head-to-head race against a race for five seats in which there were twenty candidates.

    The comparison doesn’t work.

    There were two factions at the convention, each trying to oust the other side’s supporters. Both succeeded, at least in part.

  13. IIRC

    @6,

    Didn’t Moulton also previously lose a reelection bid for vice chair?

    And Phillies runs for something every convention and is usually eliminated on the first round. Yet he keeps trying.

    Someone else already mentioned Hinkle. The LNCers that many IPRers seem to support all voted for Hinkle after he lost for both chair and at large.

    Bill Redpath lost for vice chair but then dared to be so bold as to run for at large…and IIRC he came in first. It seems that circumstances change over time, and who the delegates support at one moment is not proof of who they would support with a change of circumstances.

    The delegates adopted a bylaw that allows the LNC to choose a person to fill an empty seat. So the delegates have already agreed to accept whoever the LNC picks.

  14. George Phillies

    @17 Readers will note that I did not propose that the LNC should choose me as the new Secretary. Moulton was not a candidate for vice chair this time.

    LNCers…all voted for Hinkle…Don’t worry, we are taking notes on who is in need of de-election.

  15. Be Rational

    @15 & 16: There are all kinds of computerized auto spelling, spell checking, grammar checking, writing correcting, and language translation programs, and so far they are all flawed, some making horrendous errors, and it is a sad day that people have come to rely on them; worse when they are automatic and not optional, included by some arrogant and clueless programmer.

    Some of the language translation programs produce indecipherable drivel in the target language, and yet they are relied upon by people who don’t realize what they have produced in the other language.

  16. Jose c

    Maybe what is needed is a bylaws plank that says any candidate who seeks an office for LNC at a national convention and loses cannot be appointed by the LNC to the office that candidate sought or to any office of the LNC until an intervening national convention has been held.

    Under this plank if it was part of the current bylaws Alicia Mattson would not be eligible to appointed to the position of secretary. The delegates wishes should count for something and should be honored.

  17. Jeremy C. Young

    Jose c @20 is proposing exactly what I proposed when this came up earlier in the week. The fact that Chuck lost a previous vice-chair election back in 2008 is irrelevant. Getting voted out of a different office years ago is not the same thing as getting voted out of the same office at the previous national convention. That’s a silly argument.

  18. Stewart Flood

    @19, and very difficult to turn off on an iPad.

    But I’m on my Mac tonight, so no evil auto entry changer.

    @17, everyone loses an election at some point in time. That does not necessarily mean that they should never run again.

    Yes, Chuck Moulton was thrown under the bus in 2008. I was there. I heard the discussion and I objected to what they were planning. It was directed by the inner circle. Their motive was not to hand out a consolation prize, but to eliminate someone they felt was an enemy.

    Their candidate was selected based not on his ability but on their belief that he could win the seat. Jeremy @21 put it very well. It is not the same position, and it is five years later. Ms Mattson’s defeat was in a race for this same position, and was less than a year ago.

  19. johnO

    Is it who Ms. Mattson is dating that so many people are against her? Or not dating? Does it really matter? LP is like a soap opera now.

  20. Stewart Flood

    The issue is not who Ms Mattson may or may not be dating — or at least it should not be. Dating someone does not in itself imply mutual political beliefs and agendas. That said, Ms Mattson and Mr Starr clearly seek the same agenda and had consistent voting records when they both served on the LNC.

  21. Jake Porter

    @25

    “To determine what is actually going on, I conducted a pairs analysis. I considered
    how often each member of the committee voted
    with each other member of the committee, one by one. I ranked the pairs by their degree of congruence with each other. The five strongest pairs on the committee are:
    Starr with Mattson…… 100%
    Ruwart with Fox………..93%
    Ruwart with Wrights…. .92%
    Wrights with Fox……….92%
    Colley with Mattson……91%”

    Page 8
    http://libertyforamerica.com/201003.pdf

  22. johnO

    Like the Pink leaves. Does this say LP is being run by children? I thought only Oregon was a mess. Now is it the whole LP?

  23. Wes Wagner

    Oregon is only a mess because of the interference of national personalities in Oregon.

  24. johnO

    If this continues how does LP battle the D and R hegemony? Too bad Ms. Mattson doesn’t come on IPR and state her position on what she did or didn’t do for the faction or non-faction she belongs to. Then her account could clear some of the air in LP. This may not suffice her critics but it may be a start for her.

  25. NewFederalist

    johnO… don’t let all the infighting within the LP and especially the LNC concern you. All organizations have internal squabbles. Libertarians just are more prone to air their differences in public kinda like nudists!

  26. Jake Porter

    @28 The national party has been a mess for years. You have factions, people with large egos, a cult like focus on Robert’s Rules, and a lack of leadership. How the party does as well as it does surprises me.

    @30 Mattson is very competent and was a good Secretary as far as the job of Secretary went. If I were still a national party member, I would oppose putting her on the committee for her focus on Roberts Rules and parliamentary tricks, and the fact that she cannot get along with the other major faction.

  27. From Der Sidelines

    @24 and @25:

    Never said it was anything to do with agendas.

    Just bad, very bad, taste.

  28. Steven Wilson

    The delegates at the convention spoke loud and clear. The fact she can’t understand or refuses to acknowledge negates her specific skill set towards filling the position.

    You get what you deserve. Peace of Dysfunction.

  29. Stewart Flood

    Here’s how I see this playing out: Ms Mattson does not have the votes or the support to win election. Obviously she will run for the seat again. Her “hope” for election at the convention in Ohio is that whoever they pick does not do as good a job as she would have done.

    If she does not run for the position now, she can’t say in 2014 “see, I told you so!”

  30. wredlich

    FYI, I removed an inappropriate comment from “From Der Sidelines” (#22). Making wild accusations about someone’s sex life is unacceptable. -Warren

  31. Steven Wilson

    My point is that the people who “play” at the LNC theater are the same people. A smart person would’ve taken the no and left. But here are we are. Hinkle, Mattson, and Redpath in some fashion remaining in the production.

    To be sure, new players have been introduced, but the outcome has not changed.

    Dysfunction. Nothing more and nothing less.

    Why would someone join a organization that did almost nothing to achieve its stated goals?

    The problems with our current congress and federal government are also present in the LNC. Dysfunction.

    It is not funny, cynical, or even hazardous. It is just true.

    This is just a theater piece and the players are pretending. Those members are in attendance watching a show of nothing.

  32. johnO

    Maybe Ms Mattson should run for a different position in LP. This is becoming more than LP dysfunction it’s becoming a bore. Yawn.

  33. From Der Sidelines

    @45: Wild accusations? FYI, it was the worst-kept secret in the LP from 2009-11. Dunno where the hell you’ve been.

    I’m sorry you can’t handle the truth when presented in such a blunt and straight manner.

  34. From Der Sidelines

    To repeat #22, without offending Mr. Redlich’s delicate sensibilities, and edited to add one more point:

    @9: STFU and go back to your medical malpractice, you perpetually clueless barfly shill.

    @17: Moulton lost in Denver to Jingozian but Moulton was thrown under the bus to give a consolation prize to Jingozian, whom the Starr Chamber thought they could control. They were wrong, Jingozian was his own man, which is why they put forth Temper Tanturm Rutherford in St. Louis.

    Re-appointing Hinkle was a clusterfuck mistake.

    But remember this: When they tried to boot Wrights and he appealed to the JC, the PRP Mattson got her ass kicked by the team of Ruwart, Wrights, and Seebeck. When she tried to justify floor fees in Austin in 2009, she got her ass kicked by Marbry. When Starr got his ass kicked out in St. Louis with a 70% NO vote, she started bawling like a brat while the room CHEERED.
    When she tried to argue for the LNC EC’s ill-advised decision on Oregon in front of the JC, she got her ass kicked by Wagner.

    She simply associates with the wrong people and is not as smart as she thinks she is.

  35. From Der Sidelines

    @51: Of course they don’t. The answer is that those she goes up against and loses have the intellectual and moral high ground and she can’t see the forest for her parliamentarian trees.

  36. NewFederalist

    “I’m sorry you can’t handle the truth when presented in such a blunt and straight manner.”

    You sound like Bill O’Reilly and his “no spin zone”. The big difference is he uses his real name and can be held to account for saying potentially libelous things.

  37. Steven Wilson

    The issue that so many libertarians use Einsteins definition of insanity comes back around here. The delegates made it clear they wanted change. As did the American voter.

    1. Libertarians predominantly promote themselves at understanding economics in greater depth than the standard voter.

    2. Libertarians predominantly promote themselves as experts in the applied science of liberty and freedom more than the standard voter.

    3. Libertarians predominantly promote themselves as informed voters readily available to carry a “great” candidate to the finish more than the standard dogma of the American voter.

    And then we come to the application of such things libertarian. An LNC that could not meet for what? A month? No communication and no professionalism. The same characters but a different program cover.

    And then we come to the posters here.

    “This time it will be different”

    Einstein would not know this place. But he would know what to call each of you that support the LNC.

  38. John Jay Myers

    When you find yourself desperately trying to find percentages to make a point. You are doing it wrong.
    There is no comparison to how strongly some people opposed Mattson. Very. As opposed to someone like Moulton or Blau who offend no one, and who are not considered part of a “side”. It’s just a no brainer.

    Why elect a divisive person who can do the job, when you have two candidates, who everyone at least likes, that can do the job?

  39. From Der Sidelines

    @52: That line coming from an alias is just laughable.

    BTW, it isn’t libelous, either, for two reasons: 1. As a political party officer, that made Mattson a public figure and the rules are quite different there; and 2. It ain’t libel if it’s the truth, and it’s the truth, the whole truth, and nuthin’ but the truth.

  40. From Der Sidelines

    @54: Why indeed?

    We asked that same question before the clusterfuck of appointing the former ousted chair back to the LNC in Hinkle. Now we have to ask it again, which just compounds the question.

    Why do these people not get that they simply are not wanted in those positions? Only they can answer that, and their answers are likely full of more spin than a laundromat at rush hour.

  41. Root's Teeth Are Awesome

    @52: The big difference is he uses his real name and can be held to account for saying potentially libelous things.

    “Potentially” indeed. Even if a statement is false, it isn’t necessarily libelous. To be libelous you must prove:

    1. That the statement is defamatory. This means the accusation must be truly revolting in the minds of other people, such that they lose significant respect for the maligned person(s). AND…

    2. There must be damages. This means the libeled person(s) must have suffered financial harm due to the false statement.

    Can anyone prove in a court of law that the allegedly “shtuping” couple would have suffered financial harm due to this allegedly libelous statement?

    BTW, libertarian philosopher Walter Block argues that libel should be legal, partially because:

    Libel is “harm to reputation.”

    Reputation is what other people think of you.

    Since you cannot claim ownership of other people’s thoughts, you cannot claim an ownership interest in “your” reputation.

    Block also argues that the market is better able to protect people’s reputations than does libel law.

    Libel law only protects rich folk (both liars and victims) who can afford lawsuits, whereas poor folk (both truth-tellers and liars) are chilled into silence by libel law.

  42. Be Rational

    Libel law isn’t the only standard or consideration when it comes to the owner protecting the quality and good name of his own site. He should consider courtesy, decency and good taste as well. Private personal matters such as sexual partners or orientation, racial or religious attacks or slurs are examples of topics or posts that cross a line and the owner or his representatives should delete them.

  43. NewFederalist

    “@52: That line coming from an alias is just laughable.”

    First, it is a pseudonym not an alias and second, why would that be “laughable”? I have not accused anyone of anything. If (or when) I do be assured that I will use my real name and state the facts when making an accusation.

  44. From Der Sidelines

    @59: The only difference between an alias and a pseudonym is the spelling.

    The irony was so lost on you that you couldn’t find it with a GPS…

  45. paulie

    In other news

    Nominations have now been closed. I thought we still had all day today to receive more, but Dr. Lark interpreted “midnight on the 24th” as meaning midnight last night.

    In addition to the four nominations we received that are already posted as articles Dr. Lark has now posted applications we received from several other people whose names I did not recognize.

  46. paulie

    Nominations for LNC Secretary

    Cooke, Mark (received by Secretary, 11:27 a.m. EST, Jan. 19)

    Lester, Bill (received by Secretary, 2:58 p.m. EST, Jan. 18)

    Blakey, Robin (received by Secretary, 2:56 p.m. EST, Jan. 18; resume received by Secretary, 9:03 a.m. EST, Jan. 21)

    Mattson, Alicia (received by Secretary, 5:46 p.m. EST, Jan. 17)

    Reynolds, Robert (received by Secretary, 10:30 a.m. EST, Jan. 16)

    Blau, David (received by Secretary, 8:24 a.m. EST, Jan. 16)

    MacElroy, Bill (received by Secretary, 7:58 p.m. EST, Jan. 15)

    McDermott, Jim (received by Secretary, 5:23 p.m. EST, Jan. 15)

    Pellegrino, Anthony (received by Secretary, 3:49 p.m. EST, Jan. 15)

    Johnson, Gary E. (received by Secretary, 3:26 p.m. EST, Jan. 15)

    Roberts, Shadrack (received by Secretary, 3:09 p.m. EST, Jan. 15)

    McDowell, Jake (received by Secretary, 3:06 p.m. EST, Jan. 15)

    Moulton, Chuck (received by LNC, 4:14 p.m. EST, Jan. 14)

  47. paulie

    All of the other nominations were not forwarded to LNC list until now.

    Some included resumes, others did not; none of the ones I just learned of included a statement as to why the applicant would be the best for the position, as the four we received earlier had.

    We also received the following additional statement from Gary Johnson of Texas, in response to some of the things Alicia Mattson said in her letter (this article). I forwarded it to IPR, hopefully it will be posted as an article, but I don’t have time to do it myself. In the meantime here it is as a comment:

    To the National Committee,

    You know things are getting ugly when a statement begins with “With all due respect.”

    With all due respect, I see that Alicia Mattson has entered the race for national secretary.

    My biggest problem seems to be that I was the national secretary from 1996 to 1998. That’s so Twentieth Century. Nobody remembers me. I just did my job. No controversy, no administrative problems, no drama. I was what Alicia calls “a bump on a log.”

    I have more years of experience on the National Committee than David Blau, Alicia Mattson, and Chuck Moulton, combined. And, from 1994 to 1996, when I was an at large member, the LNC elected me “recording secretary,” which was the term used for secretary pro tem.

    Alicia claims she can “get the job done so that the LNC can focus on its own job for the rest of the term,” she will “need no time to get up to speed and figure the job out,” and she promises to finish “whatever is left in as short a time frame as is feasible.” I am sure she can. But so can I. I did it recently for the Libertarian Party of Texas.

    On June 13, 2010, I was elected at our state convention to be a regional representative on our state committee. Five months later, on November 13, 2010, our state party secretary resigned, suddenly and unexpectedly.

    He did not resign between meetings. He resigned during a meeting, shortly after it started. He got mad about how the state committee voted on something, he announced his resignation, and he walked out of the room.

    I was elected, unanimously, to fill the vacancy. I picked up the pieces, cleaned up the mess, and returned the situation to normal. This is not hypothetical; it really happened.

    On June 10, 2012, at the next state convention, when we had hotly contested races for state chair, vice chair, and treasurer, I was elected state secretary by acclamation.

    With all due respect, the National Committee has some excellent choices for national secretary. But, why would you settle for second best?

    Can I pick up this baton, hit the ground running, and finish this course? Yes, I can. I did. And, if you elect me your secretary, I will, again.

    Gary Johnson
    Former National Secretary of the Libertarian Party

    Lee Wrights wrote:

    I can vouch for every word of what Mr. Johnson says here. There is no one better suited for the job of Secretary.

    Mr. Johnson has my complete confidence and total support.

    Lee Wrights
    Vice Chair
    Libertarian Party

  48. paulie

    From Wes Benedict:

    Dear LNC members:

    I understand that Ruth Bennett has resigned from the Secretary position due to difficulties keeping up with the workload and that the LNC will vote on a replacement soon.

    I encourage you to vote for either David Blau, Gary Johnson (of Texas, not to be confused with the Presidential candidate) or Chuck Moulton. I have had my disagreements with each of them from time to time, but think each is reasonably fair, could handle the workload, and would make a fine LNC Secretary.

    I encourage you to vote against re-appointing Alicia Mattson, the former LNC Secretary who lost her reelection attempt at the 2012 convention in Las Vegas. While some have pointed out that Ms. Mattson did a good job preparing the meeting minutes and keeping track of motions, following are some reasons to keep her off of the LNC.

    1. The LP Oregon controversy.
    2. Ms. Mattson usually votes in lock-step with Aaron Starr’s recommendations.
    3. The 2009 effort to kick Lee Wrights off of the LNC. (Alerting Mr. Wrights of his impending expiration would have been an appropriate action.)
    4. See 2011 LNC-Discuss emails for (non-confidential) information about how she had this statement that I wrote reported as a platform violation: “Many Libertarians, including myself, think invading Afghanistan, invading Iraq, and passing the Patriot Act was also anti-Libertarian.”

    I consider myself to be a “big-tent” Libertarian who likes to see lots of volunteers running for office, winning lots of elections, and doing things without the Libertarian bureaucracy making things harder for volunteers.

    I believe Ms. Mattson has instigated controversies and had roles in controversies that never had to happen, and that have distracted energy away from positive party-building efforts.

    Ms. Mattson behaves calmly under pressure, and usually speaks in a professional manner. I urge LNC members to consider actions–in addition to tone and language–when considering the decorum or behavior appropriate for the LNC.

    Please vote for Chuck Moulton, Gary Johnson, or David Blau for LNC Secretary.

    Lots of information on all four can be found here:
    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/01/david-blau-application-to-fill-lnc-secretary-vacancy/
    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/01/chuck-moulton-application-to-fill-lnc-secretary-vacancy/
    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/01/gary-johnson-tx-application-to-fill-lnc-secretary-vacancy/
    https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2013/01/alicia-mattson-application-to-fill-lnc-secretary-vacancy/

    Thanks for taking the time to consider my recommendations.

    –Wes Benedict
    P.S. Feel free to forward this note to others or post online.

  49. Nicholas Sarwark

    I concur with Wes Benedict on this. I would also note that Ms. Mattson’s letter in support of her nomination conspicuously does not address any of those concerns, focusing only on qualifications for the recording aspects of the position.

  50. Scott Lieberman

    Nicholas Sarwark // Jan 24, 2013 at 12:42 pm

    I concur with Wes Benedict on this. I would also note that Ms. Mattson’s letter in support of her nomination conspicuously does not address any of those concerns, focusing only on qualifications for the recording aspects of the position.

    AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

    If Mr. Sarwark, Esq. applies for a job as a lawyer, does his CV (resume) concentrate on his qualifications as a lawyer, or does he make a big deal out of say, how much of an asset he will be to the company softball team?

  51. Robert Capozzi

    68 ns, L’Affair Wrights WAS a massive mistake certainly, and exercise in incredibly poor judgment and downright pettiness, iirc. Whether AM was complicit in it, I can’t say. Like GP’s narcing to the FEC on the LP, I could not vote for her IF she was and IF she didn’t address it.

    I’m a big believer in forgiveness, but first an adult conversation needs to happen.

    I’d note that when one applies for a job, one doesn’t recite one’s errors as a general proposition. But one should be prepared to address those errors, if asked.

    As for LPO, wasn’t Hinkle heavily involved in that one, too?

    As for the statement, I don’t know the context and I think the ideas like “platform violations” and “anti-L” linear, simplistic, and dysfunctional, it’s the case that many Ls DID support the initial Afghanistan invasion, as the US had been attacked and a response seemed appropriate, myself included. Combining it with Iraq and the Patriot Act is not a good idea, positioning-wise, IMO.

  52. Wes Wagner

    SL @69

    Your argument is not entirely congruent.

    The Secretary positions carries with it a vote … and if say NS had a history of getting his clients thrown in jail for violating court orders, it would be something you would want him to address before hiring him as a lawyer for your firm.

  53. Wes Wagner

    RC @70

    Hinkle was heavily involved both logistically and emotionally.

    You may recall his “Wagner must go!” tirade email. If not the search function will help you find it.

  54. Robert Capozzi

    more….

    Certainly if WB found that to be a personal affront, I can understand his having PERSONAL grievances with AM, along with others on the LNC who might have disagreed with his PERSONAL interpretation of Afghanistan especially. If he doesn’t see any difference between the 3 instances, that’s of course his opinion, but it’s a non-obvious one, especially without MUCH explanation.

  55. Robert Capozzi

    WW, thanks for refreshing my sometimes porous memory.

    Were there similar shrieks about putting Hinkle back on the LNC? Or did he get a pass on that count when he was added back to the LNC since he’s, iirc, basically a crypto-anarchist, and AM isn’t, iirc?

  56. Wes Wagner

    RC @75

    There were shrieks… a large (I would suggest majority) segment of the vocal members of the radical caucus opposed him and endorsed other candidates.

  57. Robert Capozzi

    WW, thanks for clarifying. Seems even-handed of you, certainly, given your position re: LPO. Consistency is generally indicated so long as it doesn’t careen down into “foolish” levels.” 🙂

    I wonder whether WB and NS took similar stances about MH. Or whether they gave him a pass on that point…..

  58. Nicholas Sarwark

    @77: I was opposed to the LNC appointing Mr. Hinkle to the LNC and lobbied my LNC representative accordingly. He voted for a different candidate to fill the vacancy.

    If you had attended the national convention, you would know that I felt rather strongly about Mr. Hinkle being off the LNC.

  59. Robert Capozzi

    78 NS, adr, but note that @ 75, I reveal that I have a “porous memory,” so it’s a crap shoot whether I’d recall it or not.

    Sometimes, the propensity to forget is an advantage, sometimes a detriment, but it’s what I have to work with. Had there been a serious move to delete the over-the-top insane SoP, maybe I might scraped something together to be part of the group electroshock, cleansing the collective consciousness of thoughts of fantasy “cults” and “omnipotent states,” but it didn’t seem in the offing. 😉

    My assessment in retrospect proved true.

  60. Wes Wagner

    RC @79

    How happy is the blameless vestal’s lot!
    The world forgetting, by the world forgot.
    Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind!
    Each pray’r accepted, and each wish resign’d

  61. Robert Capozzi

    WW, much gratitude for that, brother, I was unfamiliar with that AP poem, but it rings ever so true. You made this lessarchist’s day!

  62. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    RC @ 70: “As for the statement, I don’t know the context and I think the ideas like “platform violations” and “anti-L” linear, simplistic, and dysfunctional, it’s the case that many Ls DID support the initial Afghanistan invasion, as the US had been attacked and a response seemed appropriate, myself included. Combining it with Iraq and the Patriot Act is not a good idea, positioning-wise, IMO.”

    **facepalm**

  63. Robert Capozzi

    82 jp, care to elaborate? I have literally no idea what your intended feedback is, other than a vague sense you disagree with my statement…

  64. paulie

    If “platform violation” is dysfunctional and simplistic what is the point of any platform?

  65. paulie

    It has nothing to do with being a truther. Many non-truthers opposed the Afghanistan invasion, including many Libertarians. Notice Wes did not say ALL Libertarians. How in the world was his statement a platform violation?

  66. Robert Capozzi

    P, a directional appetizer, giving others a flavor for the collective’s intentions. Thanks for asking.

  67. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    RC: Yes, I wasn’t clear. This is what I was objecting to, mainly: ” it’s the case that many Ls DID support the initial Afghanistan invasion, as the US had been attacked and a response seemed appropriate”. I was NOT a truther back then, but I think war should be an absolutely last option, and we weren’t at that point at all.

  68. paulie

    This has already been covered in this thread, but coming in 7th of 19, not far from people who did make it on, and next after people who are now on LNC is a very different dynamic from losing head to head.

  69. paulie

    I think someone compared percentages from first place finisher and Hinkle. It would be more informative to compare percentage with Root, Pojunis, Hinkle for At Large.

  70. Robert Capozzi

    P, yes, WB’s statement was truthful, agreed. I am not a fan of using the platform as a litmus test, though I do think that was an ill-advised official. LP statement.

  71. Robert Capozzi

    88 jp, thx fer clarifying. I hear you. Completely agree on last option. I dunno, maybe there were more optinal approaches, but “where governments exist,”:( it does seem at least justified that they respond to attacks.

  72. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    “Many Libertarians, including myself, think invading Afghanistan, invading Iraq, and passing the Patriot Act was also anti-Libertarian.”

    Heck, I feel strongly enough about that statement that I almost wish it was part of our party’s mission statement.

  73. Robert Capozzi

    p and wb, I don’t see the “invasion” of Afghanistan as being an error, per se. The occupation of Afghanistan is an error, IMO. Hard to know where the L community is on this matter, but my guess is that my view is in the center of L thought on the subject.

  74. From Der Sidelines

    I see Lieberman is up to his usual malaprops.

    Of course, he simply sucks at softball because he spends too much time being a LNC Starrfly.

    Mr. Sarwark, OTOH, is well-respected and deservedly so.

    Advantage to Mr. Sarwark, by a Mile High…:-)

  75. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    rc @ 96: “I don’t see the “invasion” of Afghanistan as being an error, per se. The occupation of Afghanistan is an error, IMO”

    I think the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was a very grave error on our country’s part.

  76. paulie

    I dunno, maybe there were more optinal approaches, but “where governments exist,”:( it does seem at least justified that they respond to attacks.

    The question isn’t whether you agree or not, it’s whether Alicia Mattson was correct in allegedly saying that it’s a platform violation to share the simple truth that many Libertarians have a different perspective than you on this question through official LP channels.

  77. paulie

    I don’t see the “invasion” of Afghanistan as being an error, per se. The occupation of Afghanistan is an error, IMO. Hard to know where the L community is on this matter, but my guess is that my view is in the center of L thought on the subject.

    The question was not what you believe on the issue personally.

  78. paulie

    I think the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was a very grave error on our country’s part.

    As do I, but again not the point. The question is what we are going to do about it.

  79. Brian Holtz

    Root’s Teeth Are Awesome wrote @6:

    It?s like Root/Starr?s founding of the LNCC

    The LNCC was founded long before Root joined the LP.

    What did Mattson ever do wrong? How about her biased push-polling when she emailed (and wrote, I believe) that questionnaire on the proposed platform changes for the 2006 national convention?

    Mattson wasn’t even on PlatCom in 2006, and the 2006 PlatCom did no survey.

    As 2008 PlatCom Chair, Mattson managed the 2008 PlatCom survey. The survey confirmed that delegates wanted neither a 2004-style laundry-list platform, nor a short top-N-issues platform like the Reform Caucus had originally proposed. The survey results helped the PlatCom come together around the Greatest Hits platform.

    That platform has stood the test of time. The 2010 convention made only minor changes to it, and the 2012 convention rejected most proposals to change it.

Leave a Reply

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