Kyle Markley Responds to Richard Burke’s Letter

Mr. Markley will be sending his own letter to the members of his district in response to Richard Burke’s letter:

markley_response_2

44 thoughts on “Kyle Markley Responds to Richard Burke’s Letter

  1. Joseph Buchman

    Well, the guy can write a great letter. Will Burke now respond? Can he resist? Will he move to the district?!?! Will the http://lporegon.net website ever be updated? Can I really time travel to attend the candidate nominating convention that was over 2 months ago? Will this stupidity never end? Will the LNC do the right thing before it’s too late? Is it too late already?

    “This convention is being held to assure a Libertarian Party presence on the ballot in the event the dispute over the LPO is settled before the 2014 election.”

    Funny, I thought Aaron Starr and others told the LNC and the GJ2012 campaign it was certain to be settled before the candidate filing deadline of August 2012?

    Has anyone, anywhere, ever shown an ability to be more “overly optimistic?” (shall we say?).

  2. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    So, what happened, I had page 2 twice? I had to work on a portable because the Internet is out at my house (for some reason). Thanks to someone, if you fixed it for me.

  3. Michael H. Wilson

    No Joe the stupidity will probably never end. It started in the early 1990s and continues to this day.

  4. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I do think this letter written in response is excellent. Apparently, it is being mailed today and should hit mailboxes tomorrow. I’d say Burke’s letter will most likely backfire, as people will have received that cheesy letter from him, and then an intelligently written, classy response from Kyle just before the election. 🙂

    Good luck to Mr. Markley, BTW!

  5. paulie

    Oregon is 100% vote by mail, so a fair number of people have already voted, including between the arrival of the two letters.

    As for the original incorrect link you put 11 instead of 1 in part of the URL.

  6. Wes Wagner

    Paulie is correct on the timing. Both letters arrived and are arriving very late in the cycle.

    The money to campaign for measure 90 and their ads are a bit late too.

  7. Kyle Markley

    Unfortunately, my response won’t actually hit mailboxes until Wednesday. Apparently all mail around here gets sent to Portland for processing before it comes back to the ‘burbs, and that takes a day.

  8. Wes Wagner

    I think it is an excellent response and certainly there is value in it being out there. I don’t believe that Richard Burke actually will have a material impact on the election itself. His reputation in the libertarian community is not exactly … positive.

  9. paulie

    I think it is an excellent response and certainly there is value in it being out there.

    I agree.

    His reputation in the libertarian community is not exactly … positive.

    I doubt most people getting the letters are aware of his reputation at all.

  10. Wes Wagner

    I doubt most people getting the letters are aware of his reputation at all.

    I would not be so sure. More than half has easily been through the entire bylaws revision, referendum, and disclosures about the lawsuits and Mr Burke’s association with them.

    Unlike the Reeves group, we actually mail the entire state and try to get them involved.

  11. Richard P. Burke

    All,

    Frankly, I’m not sure that my letter, or Mr. Markley’s, will have an effect either way. Despite an ongoing myth that Libertarians pull more from Republicans than Democrats, polling done by many organizations have shown that Libertarians pull votes fairly evenly from both parties and those who wouldn’t otherwise vote at all.

    This being the case, exceeding the margin of victory would not be enough to claim that any given Libertarian race impacted the outcome. To make such a claim, the Libertarian vote percentage would have to be substantially more than the margin of victory and some sort of polling would have to be done to see where the Libertarian votes came from. If Libertarians do pull evenly from conservatives and liberals, claims of impact cannot realistic when the losing major party candidate must have won 70, 80, or 90 percent of the Libertarian vote to win.

    I may actually have done Mr. Markley a favor given that my letter, and Mr. Markley’s response, increased the number of direct mail contacts received by Libertarian voters. On the other hand, it is well known that fewer than one-third of registered Libertarians typically vote. That number is probably going to be further depressed as this is turning out to be a low-turnout election. But maybe these letters will get some of them off their butts. Perhaps, after they vote, some of them might become active. Whatever the outcome of the election, I would settle for that.

    Richard P. Burke

  12. Richard P. Burke

    All,

    There has been some discussion about my reputation in the LP. Seems to me that I have at least two reputations. One good, one bad. Someone asking about me would get one or the other, depending on who he or she talks to. Overall, all I know is that delegates at national conventions keep rejecting Mr. Wagner’s delegate configurations. And when he ran for national chair in 2012, he got a whopping 26 votes. Seems to me that his reputation isn’t so hot, except in venues like IPR. Overall, from a reputation perspective, I’d rather be me than he.

    Richard P. Burke

  13. Richard P. Burke

    Greetings, and Happy Halloween to All of You.

    Our position on the legitimacy of Mr. Wagner’s nominees is well known and has been consistent over time. As they were not nominated in accordance with the governing documents approved by LPO members at properly noticed conventions, we have never regarded them as valid.

    Mr. Markley could have participated in our properly noticed and advertised candidate nominating convention, but chose not to. Had Mr. Markley done so, he would have received our nomination and provided us at least a moral basis upon which to actively support him. Incidentally, we did not endorse Mason either.

    More significantly, Mr. Markley is a supporter of Mr. Wagner’s actions of 3/31/11, which nobody has disputed were in violation of the LPO Constitution and Bylaws. Only the state now keeps Mr. Wagner’s house of cards up, specifically the Sec. of State’s unwritten policy of following the lead of the “Chair of Record” on 3/31/11. Were this policy ever to be changed, all of the dominos would fall against Mr. Wager – including the ambiguous Judicial Committee ruling written by Mr. Sarwark which has impeded the six LNC actions which declared Mr. Wagner’s actions to be invalid.

    In all, given that Mr. Markley supports co-opting the state to achieve a political goal and supports usurping rules voluntarily adopted by members in properly noticed conventions, how can we expect that he would support and defend the Constitution, or act as a libertarian, once elected to public office? It should therefore surprise noone that we would not support Mr. Markley.

    No let’s discuss why I supported Mr. Mason.

    I have known Mr. Mason – apart from politics – for over five years. He is the general manager of my apartment complex and has been since before his first run for office in 2012. I know his wife Jackie. I’ve been impressed by how he interacts with people. Over time I came to regard him as a small-l libertarian. I think he would score about 80-80 on the Nolan chart. And his legitimacy on the ballot would not be in question.

    What’s more, Mr. Mason is open to working with the LPO in drafting and advancing legislation that promotes liberty, and I believe that my personal relationship with him would assure some level of access to him and his staff. So given my inability to support Markley, the decision to support Mason was a no-brainer.

    The Republican Party had nothing to do with it. Skeptics will remain skeptical.

    What surprises me is that Wagner supporters are so willing to gloss over the fact that Mr. Wagner has no less than 17 Republicans on his slate, many of whom have records indicating they are less libertarian than Mason. I am sure that had our slate included 17 Republicans instead of Wagner’s, this would have been presented as evidence of a Republican conspiracy.

    Which brings up an interesting point…

    Mr. Wagner and his supporters have facilitated placing more Republicans on the Libertarian slate than anyone in LPO history. Can anyone name another state LP candidate slate featuring 17 Republicans in party history??? Additional Republicans appeared on his slate in 2012. Sure, I support fusion voting, but Mr. Wagner has created a Republican cross-nominating machine for which he would condemn any of us.

    Mr. Wagner also came very close to getting away with usurping the voluntarily adopted rules of LPO members.

    If I were the type that went for black helicopter conspiracy theories, I would suggest that Mr. Wagner has done more to disrupt and dilute the Libertarian Party – and it’s slate of candidates – than any GOP leadership star chamber could dream of. Were our roles reversed, I have no doubt that Mr. Wagner would accuse me of exactly that.

    Richard P. Burke

  14. Wes Wagner

    Burke seems to have arrived at the point where he is trying to justify himself to himself, in public … it is sad. Hopefully he finds a moment of alacrity to right himself.

  15. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Mr. Wagner pulled out of the race for chair, Burke. That why he got such few votes.

    You silly people keep acting like your victories at the very beginning of both conventions were a big deal.. They were not. They were actions done quickly, before the rest of the group knew what was going on.I suppose that if I were consistently on the losing side of such an expensive and futile fight, i’d keep a tight grip on whatever straws I could grab on to, also

    Dude, you sent a letter supporting a Republican over a Libertarian candidate. ‘Nuff said.

  16. Richard P. Burke

    Jill,

    Actually, I just looked at the 2012 national convention minutes. I was incorrect; Mr. Wagner received 9 votes in the third round of voting, not 26. Mr. Wagner did not withdraw. By rule, as the lowest vote-getter, he was automatically dropped from the candidate list going into round 4. Nick Sarwark simply moved to suspend the rules to also eliminate Ernie Hancock, who got the next lowest number of votes.

    More interesting, I find it odd that you do not retort to the substance of my post.

  17. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    Burke, I’m tired of being nice to you. Your level of destruction to the LP in your state is despicable. You are not worth my time to respond to. How the f*ck do you sleep at night?

    Seriously, what is your prize if you ever “win”? You won’t, of course. Do you really think the Libertarians in your state will do anything but run you out on a rail? Tar and feathering comes to mind, but, of course, Libertarians are too gentle to deal with someone even as evil as you that way.

    I am compelled to accomplish something worthwhile in this life. Therefore, I don’t waste time on losers.

  18. Richard P. Burke

    Jill,

    I note that you still do not offer a retort to the substance of my previous post, and fail even to acknowledge information contradicting an argument you made. You resort only to assailing me.

    Richard P. Burke

  19. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    I guess I am remembering that Wes stopped campaigning. Thanks for the correction.There you go–you’ve got another tiny win you can cherish.

  20. Jill Pyeatt Post author

    And in reviewing, there was no “substance” to your post. Just more of your silly wordsmithing, which is meaningless.

  21. Richard P. Burke

    “Word Smithing”??? I guess you can call it that if you don’t want to deal with it substantively.

  22. Bob Tiernan

    Burke: “Despite an ongoing myth that Libertarians pull more from Republicans than Democrats”
    .

    .
    — If that were true, you’d have no problem bringing in many unhappy Dems all this time but you were never comfortable with so all you brought in were Repubs, some of whom wanted to change the LPO platform to have a pro-life plank. Besides, it seems to me that most Libertarian candidates in high profile races cause a Republican to lose and they take great delight in it.
    .
    Not only that, but you’ve contradicted yourself by your own stated strategies in the past when you consistently stated that you wanted to use the LPO to decide which major party candidate will win: The Republican will win if we don’t run a candidate, and the Democrat will win if we do run a candidate. Do the simple logic on that one you moron.

    .
    .
    Burke: “I may actually have done Mr. Markley a favor given that my letter…”

    .
    .
    — Oh what a hoot! You’d decapitate someone and claim that you saved him from a painful death by cancer.

    .

    .
    B. Tiernan

  23. Bob Tiernan

    Burke: “More interesting, I find it odd that you do not retort to the substance of my post”

    .
    .
    — There wasn’t much substance to it, and whatever substance was there is the same scat you’ve been saying for a couple of decades now and it has been demolished many times over by many people who have more brains in their ear lobes than you have in your thick skull.

    .
    Now here’s a question for you: Would rather be head of an LPO with five members, or be a bystander watching an LPO with a few thousand members? Those are your only choices. Any reply other than choosing on the above will be considered as picking the latter choice, and you know it.

    .
    B. Tiernan

    — Now here’s
    a question for you: Would rather be head of an LPO with five members, or be a bystander watching an LPO with a few thousand members? Those are your only choices. Any reply other than choosing on the above will be considered as picking the latter choice, and you know it.

    .
    B. Tiernan
    a question for you: Would rather be head of an LPO with five members, or be a bystander watching an LPO with a few thousand members? Those are your only choices. Any reply other than choosing on the above will be considered as picking the latter choice, and you know it.

    .
    B. Tiernan

  24. Bob Tiernan

    Wes Wagner: “Burke seems to have arrived at the point where he is trying to justify himself to himself, in public”

    .
    .
    — Public displays of justifying himself has led to absurd imagesat times. Like when he got up in front of the delagtes at the 1994 state convention to explain his actions as chair (during his pitch to get himself re-elected chair) and said he often felt like Errol Flynn (!!!!!!) fighting the statists and his LPO opponents at the same, with a sword in each hand, as he pantomimed his two-armed, double-weaponed sword fight. What an ass.

    .
    B. Tiernan

  25. paulie

    Overall, all I know is that delegates at national conventions keep rejecting Mr. Wagner’s delegate configurations.

    I think most of those delegates just think they are voting for inclusiveness.

    And when he ran for national chair in 2012, he got a whopping […] Overall, from a reputation perspective, I’d rather be me than he.

    There’s no basis for comparison, since you did not run for national chair. If and when you and Wagner both run for national chair at the same time we might have an apples to apples comparison, and even then only among a very select group of people (delegates to one national convention).

    Also, it’s not a multiple choice election. Even if you and Wagner both ran, as long as I have someone I prefer to both of you for national chair, my ballot says nothing about which of you (if any) I like less than the other one.

  26. paulie

    ambiguous Judicial Committee ruling written by Mr. Sarwark

    IIRC it was written by Judge Gray and Nick Sarwark has said he would have written it differently had he written it. I also seem to recall Nick saying that he, and perhaps some others on that judcom, did not mean to imply that any state LP slate that is recognized by any SOS of any state should always therefore automatically be the affiliate recognized by the LNC, but that in this particular case the affiliate the LNC should recognize happens to be the one recognized by the SOS. Please correct if I got that wrong.

  27. paulie

    six LNC actions which declared Mr. Wagner’s actions to be invalid.

    Those aren’t relevant to who is in fact on the Oregon ballot this year, nor to publicly going out of your way to urge Libertarians to vote for a Republican who is running against a Libertarian.

  28. paulie

    What surprises me is that Wagner supporters are so willing to gloss over the fact that Mr. Wagner has no less than 17 Republicans on his slate, many of whom have records indicating they are less libertarian than Mason. I am sure that had our slate included 17 Republicans instead of Wagner’s, this would have been presented as evidence of a Republican conspiracy.

    That could perhaps be a valid point, but it seems rather odd that you would make it. Please correct me if I am wrong: a larger percentage of candidates your faction has endorsed are Republicans than of the ones Wagner-chaired LPO has endorsed. Or was I misinformed?

  29. paulie

    And [Mason’s] legitimacy on the ballot would not be in question.

    Neither is Markley’s. They are both on the ballot, most people who are going to vote have already voted, and both of their votes will be counted. Whoever wins will be seated and will vote on legislation. Or are you expecting an emergency injunction in your court case by Tuesday after several years of litigation?

  30. paulie

    Besides, it seems to me that most Libertarian candidates in high profile races cause a Republican to lose and they take great delight in it.
    .

    Not true. In this case Burke is correct. The overwhelming evidence from many races all over the country, in multiple years, from both pre-election and exit polls, is that Libertarian candidates draw about equally from those who would otherwise vote for Democrats as from those who would otherwise vote for Republicans. Additionally, a large chunk of the LP vote comes from people who would otherwise not vote at all.

  31. paulie

    It’s true that some (I don’t know about most) LP candidates “take delight” in supposedly costing the Republicans the election. If so, they are playing into a commonly held misconception which is contradicted by overwhelming evidence and are in most cases taking delight in something that they are not in reality doing.

  32. Lynn House

    Wagner, Burke, Burke, Wagner, Burke, Wagner. For three years I’ve been trying to make up my mind where I stand. The letter to Libertarians asking them to vote for a Republican was my deciding factor. Mr. Wagner, I’m with you.

  33. David Hiniku

    Thank You again Mr. Burke.
    I really appreciate how you helped Mr. Markley and the Libertarian Party by writing a letter asking Libertarians to vote for his Republican Opponent.
    You are a great man Mr. Burke, most of us are too stupid to make the connections that you have to explain to us.

    Most of us would have considered that since you made several statements against Kyle Markley in your letter, that you were attempting to discredit him. We would have thought the main reason you urged Libertarians to vote against him was that you want to see the Libertarian Party and its candidates fail. We would have suspected you did this because you have lost the ability to have a meaningful impact on the Libertarian Party of Oregon and because you no longer make your income from being in charge of the party.

    Your wisdom again prevails. You have showed us that your letter actually helped Kyle receive more votes. I only hope that Kyle’s response didn’t do too much to take away from the help you gave him and the Libertarian Party.

    It is easy to see, Mr. Burke, why the Libertarian Party needs your leadership again. The registered Libertarians of Oregon are too foolish to make these great connections. They shouldn’t have the right to direct the party themselves. They need to be ruled by a small elitist, group of wise men like yourself.

    Thank you also, Mr. Burke, for helping clear up the frightful mistake that most of us make.
    Too many of us, Too many, Mr. Burke, believe that the Secretary of State of Oregon is the final authority on who has ballot access and who has the ability to place candidates on the ballot for a political party.
    If it weren’t for YOU–you great saint, you strong leader, you selfless warrior–we would believe that a candidate would be more likely to face a challenge if his nomination was submitted by your group that the Secretary of State does not recognize as having ballot access than by the Libertarian Party of Oregon. We are such a foolish bunch. Because you have explained it to us, we can now see that your declaration that the Libertarian of Oregon doesn’t follow the bylaws you claim are legitimate that you have more authority than the Secretary of State’s office.
    We are a lost group without you, Mr. Burke. Please come back and rule us. I know its too much to ask. I know that I am probably wrong (since I am not wise like you). But would you please run for office under the current Libertarian Party rules. I’m certain, that even though we are a daft crowd, we would be able to recognize that you know soooo much more than we do and we would certainly elect you to represent us. I’m sure you will tell me the wise reasons why you won’t. But, foolish as I am, I am concerned that the Secretary of State will never decide to replace the current group with your wise group of leaders, your oligarchy, your brain trust. I fear that they will continue to allow the Libertarian electorate to decide for themselves. So that is why I ask you to make the step and try to get elected by the Libertarians of our state.

    I know it is risky, since the foolish man always thinks he can reason for himself. I am certain, however, that your wisdom could show you the way to get elected. We are faltering without your leadership, Mr. Burke.

  34. paulie

    Wagner, Burke, Burke, Wagner, Burke, Wagner. For three years I’ve been trying to make up my mind where I stand. The letter to Libertarians asking them to vote for a Republican was my deciding factor. Mr. Wagner, I’m with you.

    I bet it would have that same effect on many other people too, if they knew about it. I’m thinking likely and actual national convention delegates, for example.

Leave a Reply

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