Steve G.

LP membership dues = taxation without representation

In Libertarian on September 6, 2008 at 6:36 pm

Angela Keaton wrote in comments:

Sullentrup, Flood, Starr, Karlan voted to remove me from the room.  It failed.

The motion is to have me removed.

Sullentrup made a scene regarding my calling Knapp.

Referred to me as “swamp.” Or something.  MO has weird terms.

Since the LNC is trying to remove an elected member of the LNC, without the knowledge or consent of the people she was elected to represent, then ALL support should be removed from the LP. Stop sending money, stop volunteering. Do not support an organization which has a leadership that thinks they can overruled the vote of the membership.

Your LP membership dues are therefore nothing more than taxation without representation!

Let them pull their Gestapo tactics in the major parties.  There is no room for this kind of nonsense among the very group which runs the so-called “Party of Principle”.

Also posted on Adventures in Frickintardistan

  1. There’s a lot of things I could do with that $25. Buy something libertarian, like greasy fast food, or porn.

  2. WOW; well, I’m glad I got the Lifetime membership for $100 this past spring. No more $$$ to the LP!

    BTW, where’s my membership card?

  3. What the f*** has happened to you, Aaron? You got me started in the party! What happened to your idealism???
    I am NOT on your side (I was in Denver, remember???)

  4. Hmmm…. I wonder just how much ballot access for Barr in MA is worth to them?

    Seems to me like getting rid of Angela would be major reason to drop out of the LP completely – including as a presidential elector….

    Or perhaps I should just insist on substituting ANGELA for George if we win the court battle for substitution…

    ART
    Currently LPMA Presidential Elector – Not voting for Barr, Speaking for myself

  5. Hey Angela:

    Hell hath no fury like 180# of ugly sociopath who has been spurned, it seems.

    Has he tried yet to bully you into signing a note saying you will give him money? You know not to sign it, right?????????

    Lori! Pay attention!!! Your turn is coming!!!

    No need to thank me.

  6. Dues? What dues? I ain’t paid national no stinkin’ dues since the national sharing agreement expired…

  7. I attended the LNC meeting as a member of the gallery. I’m not privy to anything that occurred in executive session. I believe this story leaves the wrong impression about what occurred.

    Note the important difference between these two actions:
    1. vote on whether to remove Angela from the room
    2. vote on whether to remove Angela from the LNC

    The vote conducted was the former, not the latter. In other words, the vote was on whether to have Angela leave the room while she was being discussed and while votes were being taken about her.

    I don’t think it was a good idea to ask Angela to leave the room (or vote to have her leave the room). Taking her off the LNC entirely would be far, far worse. This reporting is somewhat confusing and sensationalistic for conveying the impression that the LNC was voting on whether to remove Angela from the LNC.

    Note: I have no idea whether removing Angela from the LNC was discussed during executive session. Perhaps it was. But I know for certain it was never discussed or voted on in open session.

  8. 10,000 Texas YEE-HAH’s from Wes Benedict to Californian, Angela Keaton.

    YEE-HAH!

    (Make that 10,001!)

  9. That was tough because most self-respecting Texans don’t like Californians. I might work to get that policy encoded into the 2010 LP Texas platform.

  10. So here it is all back biting and no actual work. I feel sorry for the people on the committee who have real job skills. That they should have to put up with shit like this is unacceptable. Bill Redpath needs to get this under control.

    MHW

  11. Chuck, baby, you know what they are like. Being fair doesn’t mean pretending.

    This isn’t about me. This is about our purpose. Why the fuck are we here? I gave you all the info you need. It’s now up to the rest of you. Can’t do this one on my own.
    I need all of you. I am goddamn lucky to have all of you to teach me.

    Still touched about Michael Colley. He really is into that speak freely crap. Without that speak freely thing we don’t have much do we?

  12. Exactly, Chuck. We got our information from Angela, while you admit you don’t know, because you were not in on that discussion. That being the case, it seems strange you would decide that anything was extreme.

    Yes, removing her would indeed be extreme. No, this is not an extreme response, given that members of the LP are forced to pay dues to be a member of that political party. If the LNC doesn’t want to answer to the membership, then it should stop charging dues. In the meantime, if members’ duly elected representative is involuntarily removed, then members will be robbed of the representation they chose, but will still be forced to render dues, and certainly would not be refunded any dues paid in advance.

    This was not a surprise. Many of us expected this to happen at this meeting, simply because Mr. Starr has an ongoing feud with Ms. Keaton. Ms. Keaton expected it as well.

    In the meantime LP members can and will respond with their wallets, and their feet, if certain people on the LNC continue to act in an abusive manner toward duly elected representatives.

  13. Amen, ENM!

  14. Angela hang tough. Hey gang it is time to mail national tea bags. Cheap ones that is!

    MHW

  15. I was under the impression that you could not remove an elected LNC member.

    In 2010, is there a way to remove Starr, or is he permanently in there?

  16. I vote to keep Angela in the room and to formally ask the California bean counter to quit making a fool of himself. The LP needs fools to do certain things but the California bean counter is risking making himself a worthless fool.

  17. WOW; well, I’m glad I got the Lifetime membership for $100 this past spring. No more $$$ to the LP!

    That was a misprint. It’s actually $1000.

  18. If the vote motion was to remove Angela from the room, which was a motion and therefore will be in the minutes, was it a motion to remove her temporarily, permanently, or for some purpose, namely while as I understood the thread they were doing something else? What else?

    I mean, the motion as interpreted by Mr. Moulton seems to be missing something.

  19. WOW; well, I’m glad I got the Lifetime membership

    BTW, I paid for one of those in 2000, saving me the decision of whether to pay dues or not.

    However, I note that I may withdraw from the party by repudiating the membership pledge. I’m considering it. I recently have learned that the membership pledge actually does not mean what I thought it did when I signed it.

    I believed at the time that it meant rejecting initiation of force, including by government, as acceptable. Now, Mr. Nolan says that it actually means the categoric rejection of terrorist tactics to overthrow or resist the existing regime.

    In fact, using violent means to fight back against a tyrannical government is not an initiation of force, and becomes a more justified and necessary option as government becomes more tyrannical and slowly but surely eliminates peaceful ways of self defense and social change
    as realistic alternatives.

    As time goes on, these two interpretations of the pledge come ever more into direct conflict. I need to know what side I will be on, and thus I’ll have to resolve the issue of what the party’s membership pledge really means.

  20. Paulie,

    Keep speaking to people, and you will learn more interpretations.

    Sooner or later you will hit the Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian Libertarian–I forget, and suspect neither of those gentlemen invented the interpretation–interpretation, namely that the pledge mandates the collection of taxes for certain specific government functions.

    You may also hit the anti-Platonian people, who reject the claim that you can ‘logically derive’ consequences and solutions to all Libertarian questions by contemplating a small number of starting propositions.

    George

  21. I saw the “$100” figure and was considering Life-ing up. $1K isn’t a very good deal — one would need to be a member for more than 40 years to make it cost-effective compared to the year-by-year $25. In 40 years I’ll be 73. Of course, we will also be a quarter-century past the completion of President Root’s 16-year plan, so I may be in the Cabinet or something.

  22. Paulie,

    Keep speaking to people, and you will learn more interpretations.

    Sooner or later you will hit the Jeffersonian or Hamiltonian Libertarian–I forget, and suspect neither of those gentlemen invented the interpretation–interpretation, namely that the pledge mandates the collection of taxes for certain specific government functions.

    You may also hit the anti-Platonian people, who reject the claim that you can ‘logically derive’ consequences and solutions to all Libertarian questions by contemplating a small number of starting propositions.

    George

    Thanks. Already have encountered both.

    However, I give some weight to what David Nolan says he meant.

    How can I do otherwise?

    It’s becoming more of a problem for me, philosophically, as the odds of potential conflict in practice increase.

  23. I saw the “$100″ figure and was considering Life-ing up.

    I thought that only went out to Alabama. I guess not.

  24. The Pledge means what it means to you when you sign it. It’s what the ratifiers think that matters, not the framers.

    I repudiate Nolan’s interpretation of the Pledge, which is entirely anti-American.

  25. There is a process for removing each type of member from the LNC. It is in the Bylaws.

    To make it harder to the members to see their own bylaws, the LNC has posted the Bylaws in noncopyable form on its web pages. The minutes are the same way, except the old ones are not posted.

    I agree with Paulie that Nolan’s interpretation of the oath is the one that matters.

    By the way, Angela is liveblogging again.

    We already have what is in my position the most idiotic political campaigning opinion I have recently read being advanced, assuming Angela quoted right, by the Barr campaign (in absentia) and by Lee Wrights as Mary Ruwart’s former campaign manager, namely that the Presidential campaign’s materials need not mention the name of the party.

    The entire point of our presidential effort is to advance the party’s name. A campaign that does not do so is totally worthless.

    By the way, the Wrights statement shows that the Ruwart campaign would have been equally as worthless as the Barr campaign, and confirms and confirms what many Libertarian centrists have been saying: The radical wing is as bad as the Republican Lite wing.

    There are also some bizarre claims about Barr fundraising that, well, don’t match the FEC reports.

  26. On IPR, Chuck Moulton was kind enough to give the quote from the Barr handout that in my opinion confirms Angela’s quote from it

    “Paragraph 5: As I said before, the media has turned its attention from the LP-proper to the Barr campaign, so most of the media focus from our end has been in promoting Bob.”

    Chuck puts a different spin on the Barr statements, but retyping text is a pain and we should be grateful to him for his effort.

  27. “That was tough because most self-respecting Texans don’t like Californians. I might work to get that policy encoded into the 2010 LP Texas platform.”

    Wes, you better make an exception for Team Seebeck on that. We’re only in California for the employment. Not out ball of tea or cup of wax here–too urban. And too much CO blood (and IN and MD and NY and IA and MA!) in us.
    😀

  28. “I vote to keep Angela in the room and to formally ask the California bean counter to quit making a fool of himself. The LP needs fools to do certain things but the California bean counter is risking making himself a worthless fool.”

    Wes, some of us have felt that way for a few years…

  29. George @25:

    “To make it harder to the members to see their own bylaws, the LNC has posted the Bylaws in noncopyable form on its web pages. The minutes are the same way, except the old ones are not posted.”

    I have no problems with it, simply copy them from the PDF into Word or even Wordpad and go from there…

    But the old minutes should be posted, ditto the LP News…

  30. George @ 25 #2, RE: LP on materials:

    “Wrights: It is a concern for website but not as important stickers/signs.”

    I read that not as dissing the idea, but prioritizing it. In the Bsticker case, space constraints because too small type is not very readable, even in traffic jams (only in parking lots)–and (yard? rectangular post?) signs have similar constraints.

    Let’s not jump to that conclusion on Wrights yet.

  31. The Pledge means what it means to you when you sign it. It’s what the ratifiers think that matters, not the framers.

    Wouldn’t solve my problem if true.

    I thought I was joining a party based on the non-initiation of force principle, whose purpose was to redefine the accepted means which can be employed by government in view of this principle.

    I proceeded to engage in a lot of activity for the party based on that understanding, which included becoming a life member, going on the road to get the LP on the ballot, college organizing, and so on.

    The basis of that activity was apparently a misunderstanding.

    So, I may have taken a wrong turn. Since I went very far down a path guided by what may have been a wrong turn, I’m not sure what I should do.

    If the pledge just means whatever anyone who signs it thinks it means, including those who think it mandates coercive taxation, those who think it forbids it, those who think it forbids any physical resistance to an out of control government, and those who think it means nothing whatsoever, the latter are correct.

    In this case it is just another political party, which happens to be called Libertarian. Not good enough: what you call something is far less important than what it does in reality.
    The emperor’s new clothes, etc.

  32. The entire point of our presidential effort is to advance the party’s name. A campaign that does not do so is totally worthless.

    How completely unfair! Barr is running to win.

  33. Michael,

    See if you can copy part of the Bylaws. It appears to have the PDF copylock set.

    I will by and by ask Tamara to post the PDF of the NH fundraiser, complete with signs

    VOTE LIBERTARIAN

    NEWELL

    GOVERNOR

    LibertySue.org

  34. What’s a PDF copylock? Is it one of those things that only gets paid attention to if you are running an Adobe reader, or are working with a Microsoft based OS?

    Linux has multiple PDF display tools, many of which have the ability to do PDF translation to other formats, and which don’t particularly pay attention to locks and such…

    However there is a way that gets problematic, to transfer, namely if the original document is transformed to a graphic (photo) format, and then that graphic is made into a PDF – Then you have to run the file through an OCR program, which may have it’s own problems depending on font, etc…

    ART

  35. Just did the transfer using Adobe Reader 8 to Word without any problems. George, it’s in your email.

  36. @Mike– is this another “never piss off an engineer” moment?

    @Wes– A lot of Californians think that Aaron and the rest of the Starr chamber are insane/stupid/incompetent/etc. I mean look at what happened in San Ramon. Not exactly what you refer to as supportive of the Starr chamber.

    There’s a certain mix of opinion concerning Angela too (not all of it political) but it’s generally more positive. Especially here.

    I understand your hatred of Californians– I used to refer to them as “Californicators” when I lived in Colorado. Plus you are probably associating California with Starr. Does the 2010 proposal cover Calfornians who are originally from another state? I promise the only Cali attitude that we will bring is a love and knowledge of citrus (and we share).

    @Angela apples&peaches out, but still have end-season oranges. Guavas not yet. That is a big hint.

  37. Nah, just a technology snafu. It happens.🙂

  38. Okay, I stand corrected. Subsequent events strongly suggest an earlier “remove from LNC” discussion in the first day’s executive session, which as I said I was not privy to.

  39. Lidia Seebeck:

    All comments I make generally condemning Californians and hyping Texans as a superior peoples should be taken in jest. I’m a Louisianan who wound up in Texas cause the moron Texas taxpayers paid me to come here for college a couple decades ago at which I learned college is largely a waste of time but followed up with a master’s degree in Michigan just to make sure and I’ve lived in California plus got about a third of my kin folk living there: north, and south.

    But make no mistake about this, it’s fun to be a damn proud Texan and I mean that from the bottom of my heart!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: