Here is a public document filed by a member of the Reeves group, regarding the competing faction for leadership of the Oregon LP:
ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION – Libertarian Party of Oregon (by Eric B. Saub…
Also, this correspondence was received this week:
Letter from SOS denying complaint (P0307536)
For the almost two-year history of the dispute regarding the Libertarian party of Oregon, the reader can type Oregon Libertarian Party into our search box,and there are almost 50 articles discussing what has occurred.
See @4-6 in that thread.
Paulie@54: Huh? Comments from Wes?
You can also see response from Wagner et al in comments @53.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23EiHien9ts
I’m more into Old Christmas, wassail riots and general misrule.
A festive Yule to one and all!
Deve Terry: I’ve got a cake and candy to make, besides tons of wrapping still. I get your point that you disagree with me.
Merry Christmas to you, and I hope you have a loving and peaceful holiday!
That’s not going to happen.
Define success.
Jill Pyeatt // Dec 23, 2012 at 1:32 pm (36)
is “stunned” that I would have a problem with turning the Libertarian “POLITICAL” Party into a hippy “Love-In”.
The irony is that, as small as it is, the LP is much more divided than either of the major “political”
parties. That MAY be because they are actually
“political” parties, where winning elections is an actual, if not eminent, GOAL!
Can one picture the LP having a “Eleventh Commandment” like the GOP did. THAT is a laughable proposition. The LP Oregon is just a microcosm of the historical Libertarian Party.
Between the “defense caucus” and the “radical
caucus” there will NEVER be any resemblance of
“unity” Those of us in the mainstream of the LP
find themselves pulled in different directions, not unlike, the man who is being drawn and quartered.
We may never reconcile the conflicting PRIME
DIRECTIVES of our movement. Peace AND liberty are more often in conflict than not!
HOW will the Libertarian Party deliver liberty,
if it is infinitely postponed waiting for ALL of the
parties to the process to stand in the same place, at the same time, facing the same direction.
NOR, will anything constructive occur if the message is constantly being diluted by adding
new issues and priorities, UNLESS there is a corresponding list of achievements on the plus side of the ledger.
Idealists MAY stick around for the “pie in the sky”, IF there are some cookies or cup cakes to munch on while. Nothing instills confidence like a success or two.
HOW LONG has it been since the LP has had a success?
END OF PART I
Dave Terry says @ 20: “Yet, the Wagner cabal’s FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS was to open the decision making process to ANYONE who was REGISTERED
as a Libertarian.”
THIS is your problem? This is what the whole thing is about??? Wow. I’m stunned.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAmFCKcK8Lw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNQXu2njMao
FL @43
We also had more libertarian candidate son the ballot. In 2010 we had 7 in 2008 we had 5 IIRC … this year we nominated over 40 had well over 20 who fulfilled all their obligations to make it onto the ballot.
OR’s 24,089 1.35% for Johnson was much better than Barr’s 7,635 0.42% in ’08. So I say it was a good year for the LP in OR in spite of their problems. I find myself on the side of STOP PICKING this sore spot. Let them work out their differences in ’13. Hopefully they can !
LP Solutions Contest Winner – Elizabeth Brierly – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvQAfgNHPjM&feature=relmfu
Do something productive in 2013!
Take Over your local weekly “socialist rag” – http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150186098157699
There is a political party that believes the family budget is more important than the Federal budget. A political party that is working to restore the hopes and dreams of every hard-working American family.
It is the Libertarian Party. http://www.lp.org/
There is much work still to do. Oh won’t you please help now with a most generous gift.
https://www.lp.org/contribute
That’s James Ogle. His problem with the LP is not about Oregon, it’s that the LP is an actual party with an ideology and not part of his fantasy US Parliament where “all candidates” can run regardless of what they believe in.
He’ll use Oregon, or any other controversy in the LP, to try to score rhetorical points against the party, but his beef has nothing to do with any of those controversies or factions.
On Ballot Access News someone is upset too about Oregon issue. I believe its on a thread about jon barrie and CP?
Dave Terry // Dec 23, 2012 at 11:51 am
“… I say, BE HONEST! If you have any evidence of criminality, let’s see it … ”
OK …
http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20070720/NEWS0107/707200448/
“That is the same Eric Saub that is also the alleged vice-chair of the Reeves faction.”
… and
Here is an article about Eric Saub who committed the crimes which includes a picture.
http://www.bendweekly.com/Central-Oregon-News/2161.html
So, Dave Terry … Is that your guy? Not a criminal? Go ahead, vouch for him.
Did he file papers to register a non-profit corportation as the LP of OR? Why this guy? According to the news reports, it seems like he needs money and is willing to commit real crimes to get it …
Does it look like another attempt at obtaining a bit of spending money? … Hey why not loot some donors who are unaware of who’s behind this new group, eh?
Now, Dave Terry, perhaps you are not one of the problem members of the Reeves cabal. If so I’m sure you will disassociate yourself from the others.
It is really time for the Reeves cabal to disband itself.
David you might want to ask Burke about the pledge. He once thought it should be deleted. And as far as Republicans go, well there has been more than one in the LPO for years. You might even ask Burke why he wanted the LPO to not run a candidate in 1996. After all Burke was supporting the Republican candidate, Bill Witt that year and Burke made a serious effort to keep the LP from nominating anyone.
Burke fits the Republican party like a glove. There are more than a few of us who have seen and heard all of his excuses and managed to live through his games. But he is your boy so enjoy.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxzx–bykUM
@36: Of course not, he’s a legend in his own mind, as senile as it is.
@35: “Clearly we have an obvious delineation of who IS or who IS NOT a libertarian.”
Indeed, and you are not. You need a quick-acting sedative and a time-out before you have an aneurysm…
DT @ 35: “What is REALLY UNBELIEVABLE is that I would actually need to argue this on a list that has so many LP leaders on it!”
Hmmm, if that were me, I think I’d re-think my original position–Has it occurred to you that maybe it’s YOU who’s wrong, not the rest of us?
The coward on the sidelines says;
“Nice to know where he stands, which is not in
favor of equality of opportunity, and that he is
not truly a libertarian despite vociferous
protests to the contrary.
Clearly we have an obvious delineation of who IS or who IS NOT a libertarian.
Since WHEN, is the idea of right of association,
NOT a libertarian TENET (is this better Herr spelling nazi Phillies) Since WHEN is the idea that the Libertarian Party’s INTERNAL affairs should be determined by actual Libertarians, not every collectivist or neo-conservative that decides to register Libertarian, in order to purge the NAP or the Bill of Rights.
Is there even ONE state that could prevent the members of the Democrats or Republicans from completely over whelming us at the Registrars Office
This makes as much sense as those who think that freedom can be maintained WITHOUT the right to own property, including firearms.
What is REALLY UNBELIEVABLE is that I would actually need to argue this on a list that has so many LP leaders on it!
In some cases it is legitimate, such as whistleblowing.
In others just an excuse to be mean and cowardly.
Th readers should be able to decide which is which.
As someone who chooses to post under a pseudonym I do agree that if serious charges are being made then it seems to me the accuser should identify him or herself to be taken seriously. And yes I post under a pseudonym for work related reasons. I am retiring soon and then I will identify myself and everyone will be very disappointed because I am no one anyone here is likely to know or care about in the least.
And yes, people should be free to express their views without the threat of physical force, loss of employment, or other such consequences if someone doesn’t like what they have to say.
Jill,
Seems like a legitimate issue of contention.
As for “Jonah Falcon”: once again, you are welcome to attack me personally to your heart’s content here:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/02/debate-on-debate-parameters-plus-should-paulie-stay/
or here:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/01/thread-for-discussion-on-petitioners-2/
or here:
https://independentpoliticalreport.com/2009/08/thread-for-discussion-on-petitioners/
My criminal history is not a secret and neither is anything else. Just because it happened in Oregon does not make a completely unrelated Oregon controversy an excuse to grind your axe.
IPR is private property, and freedom of speech is constrained as it would be in someone’s house or restaurant, etc.
Removing your posts has nothing to do with “censorship” or trying to conceal any facts about my past or present actions. It has to do with maintaining a conversation that sane people want to keep participating in.
If anything, I waited longer than I otherwise would have to start removing your posts because I did not want to use my position as an editor here to censor criticism of myself.
Mentioning it was fine. Continuously grinding your axe, not so much.
Regarding posting anonymously:
There are many reasons to do it – employment related, personal, political, and so on.
In my case I did not want my real last name used publicly for a long time because I had received death threats.
I’ve now decided not to worry about that.
It’s a decision everyone should have the right to make for themselves….and likewise, readers should consider whether personal attacks from an anonymous source should be given less weight or not.
Now stack that up with how much we watched multiple regimes of the LNC Inc provide them material support and try to put them into power.
WW @ 28. Oh.My.Goodness.
Unbef*ckinglievable.
JP @25
That is more or less the main issue of contention.
Dave Terry also says: “Just like the open primaries passed in several states: ANY Socialist or Fascist has the same voting priviledges that those of us who have dedicated years of time, energy and money to the cause of the LP.
THAT’S INSANE!!!!!!”
Wow, again I’m stunned. Just, wow. I’m uncharacteristically without words.
Dave Terry: Be Rational is often a commenter here. He understands what’s going on, and chooses to use an anonymous name for some reason or another. Perhaps he’s on a state board and doesn’t think his views represent his state, or maybe his profession is one where his political views need to stay non-public. What he says here is respected by most, if not all, of us regulars..
Dave Terry says @ 20: “Yet, the Wagner cabal’s FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS was to open the decision making process to ANYONE who was REGISTERED
as a Libertarian.”
THIS is your problem? This is what the whole thing is about??? Wow. I’m stunned.
It’s coming from an IP anonymizer. I would have already blocked it otherwise.
Wow. A real mess.
“on’t have a clue about the exact tenants
of libertarianians”
Why would they know whether or not I am renting to anyone?
Having said that, IMHO the petition thread rule is being violated again. Perhaps the owner should warn a few people that if they do not stop their numerical IDs will be posted.
So we see that Dave “Dissin'” Terry favors some having more say than others ala Animal Farm.
Nice to know where he stands, which is not in favor of equality of opportunity, and that he is not truly a libertarian despite vociferous protests to the contrary.
re; JohnO #15;
Wagner states: “I would characterize our faction as people who believe that the Libertarian Party of Oregon is an organization that is a sovereign entity and not a feudal territory of the LNC Inc., and that all registered libertarians in Oregon have an equal right in the organization.
This CLEARLY shows that the impetus behind the Wagner faction IS ideological and BAD (left) wing ideology at that.
Anyone who has done the least amount of organizing for the LP is aware that there are a large number of folks who are registered libs. who don’t have a clue about the exact tenants
of libertarianians. (I have organized two county parties in Oregon and fully 20% of those I contacted initially had no idea that they were even registered as “libertarians”
Yet, the Wagner cabal’s FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS was to open the decision making process to ANYONE who was REGISTERED
as a Libertarian.
Just like the open primaries passed in several states: ANY Socialist or Fascist has the same voting priviledges that those of us who have dedicated years of time, energy and money to the cause of the LP.
THAT’S INSANE!!!!!!
Well, we have yet another gutless, clueless troll, spreading lies and distortions.
“Be Rational”, he says. I say, BE HONEST! If you have any evidence of criminality, let’s see it and IF you wish to have any credibility, identify yourself and state how you came by this evidence.
@17
Thank you for your impression or point of view of whats going on there.
johnO @15
It is far more complicated than that.
Be Rational @14 has had morphing attitudes about this situation over time as the facts slowly trickled out and could possibly give a more objective 3rd party impression.
I can state though that it cannot be about ideology or personality differences entirely because this faction has both right-wingers and left-wingers in it, and has people who love/like me and who dislike/hate me in it.
I would characterize our faction as people who believe that the Libertarian Party of Oregon is an organization that is a sovereign entity and not a feudal territory of the LNC Inc., and that all registered libertarians in Oregon have an equal right in the organization.
That, to me, appears to be the largest point of division. It also appears to be the main source of conflict we have with the LNC Inc and its agents.
Here is an article about Eric Saub who committed the crimes which includes a picture.
http://www.bendweekly.com/Central-Oregon-News/2161.html
Is the split in Oregon about ideology or personality differences?
The Reeve’s Cabal: crazies, con-artists, criminals and conspirators. Each one out to loot, disrupt, derail or destroy the LP.
National LP leaders need to Wake UP!
Our REAL LP affiliate in Oregon needs our help and support. Let’s get busy and build a strong, successful LP in OR and nationwide and stop all the BS games and worse, as in Oregon.
@9 that sounds like a good public relations move. 1990’s all over again.
However, moving off the LP.org servers is on the LSLA agenda for their next meeting, which I believe is this weekend.
Yes.
So the LNC, by providing the server that operates the LSLA mailing list to which the Reeves group has use, is now providing a benefit to a group that is seemingly breaking the LNC’s admittedly legally dubious claim to have a trademark on “Libertarian Party” as a political group name?
MHW@8
That is the same Eric Saub that is also the alleged vice-chair of the Reeves faction.
Can we assume that there are two people with the same name? If this piece is correct someone needs to ask some questions.
http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20070720/NEWS0107/707200448/
Works for me now.
This has nothing to do with Tom Stevens and the Objectivist Party as far as I know.
Works fine here.
Objectivist Party?
I deleted the first file and re=posted it. It’s working for me.
The first file does not work (at least not for me). Error message reading: “File does not begin with ‘%PDF-‘
There was a break in discussing the Oregon LP debacle here on IPR for awhile, but there has been new correspondence that some readers might wish to follow. If you’re sick of hearing about it, please just skip this article!