Fwd: Angry Letter to Libertarian Party - Where the F*** are you?

[Lance Cayko]

See below. I have been fielding calls messages and comments on posts like this nonstop for 24 hours now. This is why I would like to have a coming to Jesus discussion

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Lee Wenger <weng...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:42 PM
Subject: Angry Letter to Libertarian Party - Where the F*** are you?
To: <communicati...@lpcolorado.org>

I have called myself a Libertarian for at least 2 years officially and really considered myself an Independent most of my adult life.  As I see the 2 parties pulling further and further apart I've believed for quite some time that its time for a legitimate third party but to be candid when I look at the Libertarian Party, or at least the LPColorado web page, i'm really not convinced that I see a party that is ready to be taken seriously or maybe it doesn't even want it.  The party seems to enjoy seeing itself as the resistance, the Rebel Alliance if you will, but, honestly, it doesn't seem to take a stand on anything substantive... it just positions itself somewhere nonconfrontationally and nebulously in the middle - this has to change if Libertarians are to ever actually become a player.  Whether stated outright or not I believe the key issues of this last election were Healthcare, Immigration, Racism, Socialism, Education, Nationalism vs Internationalism, Taxation, and to a lesser degree national debt...  I really don't see any tangible position on any of these... yes, I can infer from other elements what those positions might be but honestly, how can the party, or more importantly its candidates, ever hope to win without really staking out some high ground.  

The Party needs to be brutally honest with itself:

Pros:

- I believe millions of Americans are completely disillusioned with the 2 party system and are looking for an alternative.

- With the Democrats winning the house yesterday I believe they'll likely make a lot of noise and accomplish almost nothing for the next 2 years so there will be a great opportunity for an alternative.

- I believe the support for Trump is fairly low and mostly exists as an "anti-Democrat" platform.  Again there is a huge opportunity for an alternative.

Cons:

- The current approach is not working - candidates aren't even getting enough attention to have any effect on elections at any level

- Sorry to throw anyone under the bus, but the current candidates have simply not been good enough - they're not electable enough to get enough donations to have even a remotely legitimate opportunity to win (and just to cut to the chase, As much as I wish I were that person, it's unfortunately not me either... but I think they exist and they need to be recruited)

- The current platform doesn't mean anything or stand for anything - "Hey, We're in the Middle!!" yeah, I believe that's a good place to be but its also been proven not to be meaningful in a getting votes kind of way.

Solutions:

1. Strong Current Pragmatic (instead of Idealism) based Platform:

- Party of the future... focused on a highly competitive international economy

- Healthcare Take the 100% opposite approach to the Democrats on healthcare...  Solve the health care cost problem not through the next failed government-run disaster like USPS or VA but through hyper-competition.  Focus on remove protections allowing providers, payers, and drug producers to gouge parts of the system...  

- Practical and realistic approach to Immigration - border wall is ridiculous but immigration security is important.  There needs to be a path to citizenship - it is the only practical solution.

- Target issues that people care about

- Practical limitations on gun purchases and ownership as an example

2. Focus election efforts tactically... there is no point on having 20 candidates running in 20 different races each of which has a 1 in a billion chance of winning.  Train the electorate that when you see a candidate with an L by their name, not only does it mean something about their beliefs but it also means they're a legitimate candidate with a genuine opportunity to win.  Right now the L might as well stand for lunatic - sorry for the cold, hard, truth.

3. Genuine grassroots fundraising... obviously, its nearly impossible to win elections without the marketing & advertising effort - this must start with building a strong database of disillusioned voters that are looking for a better alternative...   

4. Recruit electable candidates - if you can't find an electable candidate don't run anyone - now more lightweights...  Ideal candidates are: Women, Of some mixed or some non-white ancestry, have a military background, have significant public service and/or business success.  There is a real need for inspiring candidates.

5. - Utilize a "hack" strategy that I think should be considered.  And by Hack, I don't mean computer hacking as in Russian Hacking, its more about a Strategy that could allow the party with as few as 2 or 3 key positions to have radically disproportionate power.  Voter's have to believe that they're not throwing their vote away when they vote for a Libertarian candidate.

I'm not here just to complain, I've sat on the sidelines and it's a lot easier to be a Monday morning Coach than it is on Sunday afternoon.  At this point I'm willing to get involved - let me know what I can do to help.  I'd like to create a better real third party that rejects and ejects the lunacy of both of the 2 main parties but these need to start with a party that takes itself seriously and can have a vision and a roadmap to having real impact.  As with most political parties, I'm sure there is a party hierarchy and you'll want to stick outsiders at the bottom, because that's how its always done... but I think its time for the party to essentially start over... Hate to be the bearer of bad news but you're not making a difference right now and the party is really a joke.  That might be the biggest shame of all because it's so clear how badly the country needs another option to make a difference.  I would like to get involved and I would like to help but I don't want to waste my time.  I don't think I'm alone - its time for the Party to seriously ask itself if (and then how) it will actually make a meaningful difference.

Lee Wenger

Business Owner/Citizen

weng...@gmail.com

303.882.6442

--

In Liberty,

L A N C E   C A Y K O

C o m m u n i c a t i o n s  D i r e c t o r

LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF COLORADO

[Database Manager]

Well, I've been advocating for Procedures on how directors do their basic jobs for 2 years now, and we can't even do that.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LPCO-open-business" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lpco-open-busin...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lpco-open...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lpco-open-business/CAENsucjU30%2B9CteYLeyZrkv1torCsU17PgdckQfoV2BBN-hCYg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

David Aitken, Database Manager
Libertarian Party of Colorado

databas...@lpcolorado.org

[John Hjersman]

Passion.  Love it!  And he ain't wrong.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:46 PM Lance Cayko <communicati...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

--

John Hjersman

Trea...@lpcolorado.org

[Lance Cayko]

David,

“I” hear you.  I will be focusing soley on mine.  Is there an example?

[Database Manager]

Procedures manual - Write down 1) what you do; and 2) how you do it.

1) Write 100-200 words for LP News every month.

2) contact affiliates and directors for news.

2a) get affiliate emails from regions director.

2b) ask affiliate contacts for 1 sentence about meeting speakers and/or special events (outreach booth, road cleanup, 3 new members, etc)

2c) due date 10th of the month.

2d) send to lpn...@lp.org (or whatever it is)

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:58 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

He is wrong on some things John unless you are suddenly a fan of gun control.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:56 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Then call a planning discussion.  All I am saying is that is not a monthly business meeting item.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:54 PM Database Manager <databas...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lpco-open-business/CABSgji1y94us5EgscfkJDciiW5U%2BWhDRKewdCgLdjgS1DhMgJA%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

  In Liberty,

Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.org or Secr...@LP.org.

Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPe...@LP.org

Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/

=========================================================================

Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation * 

VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org

=========================================================================

--

  In Liberty,

Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.org or Secr...@LP.org.

Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPe...@LP.org

Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/

=========================================================================

Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation * 

VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org

=========================================================================

[Fundraising Director]

This is precisely the type of discussion we need to have. There is "gun control" and there is "gun control." A strong case - which I made repeatedly and successfully - can be made for the right of self-defense through gun ownership. Going from this to an absolute refusal to even discuss things like red flags, large capacity mags, bump stocks...not to mention automatic weapons, RPGs, McNukes...means an end of discussion for a huge number of people. This is what he means by "pragmatic." 

 

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:58 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

He is wrong on some things John unless you are suddenly a fan of gun control.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:56 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Then call a planning discussion.  All I am saying is that is not a monthly business meeting item.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 1:54 PM Database Manager <databas...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lpco-open-business/CABSgji1y94us5EgscfkJDciiW5U%2BWhDRKewdCgLdjgS1DhMgJA%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

  In Liberty,

Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.org or Secr...@LP.org.

Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPe...@LP.org

Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/

=========================================================================

Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation * 

VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org

=========================================================================

--

  In Liberty,

Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.org or Secr...@LP.org.

Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPe...@LP.org

Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/

=========================================================================

Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation * 

VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org

=========================================================================

--

Roger Barris

Fundraising Director-Libertarian Party of Colorado

fundraisi...@lpcolorado.org

7209791115

[Matt DiGiallonardo LPCO Membership Director]

The board holds to the central principles, but candidates and their message is entirely on them, and we shouldn't lead the charge against them should their position not be perfect. 

The absolute of the platform is, essentially, advocating for anarchy or the most minimal state imaginable. We currently have a very large government. 

Ideas exist between here and there, and people can unite behind an idea much more easily than an entire platform. I'd like to simply be in the business of finding the best ways to open up avenues for these ideas to be expressed to more people and putting in the groundwork to get an audience with them, be it on their doorstep or otherwise. 

The issue can be summarizes within this conversation. Why did I spend time reading all of this? 

I am of the idea that if it is time spent which doesn't earn votes or dollars, it is a quantifiable waste of time. 

I don't know if any of that matters to anyone, but I hope you'll take the time to digest it.

Matt DiGiallonardo, LPCO Membership Director

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 2:26 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com wrote:

Sorry Roger but you are stuck with the SoP.  Make an argument congruent with that or you are basically suggesting that LPCO disaffiliate from the national party.

I can make such an argument for McNukes.  

But bump stocks and high capacity magazines and the like are simply never going to be advocates for ”control.”

You like hard reality.  There it is.

Any talk of advocating nonlibertarian positions is a nonstarter.

AND that is not the business of the Board.

How to tactically promote what our actual positions ARE and positive steps to get there are a different matter.

Anyone kvetching about the foundations beliefs of the Party is on a fools errand.  We are what we are and that's by design.  We are not just better Republicans.  And we are not centrists. This is not me saying this, it is the unchangeable ideology we adopted which is a condition of affiliation with national.

Unless you are suggesting affiliation, its simply NOT an option.

We believe in NO gun control.  We believe that ALL drugs should be legalized... To name a few.  We don't gave to agree on steps or speed to get there (though the LPCO platform does say that).

As the Board you cannot advocate against the Platform.  There is a way to amend.  And considering it was JUST rewritten, that ain't likely.

Angry letters about what we believe are not our problem any more than someone angry that you are taller than they are.

Methodology is where there is lots of board influence.  The Boards job us to uphold our Platform and Bylaws.  It is the delegates job to make changes that don't conflict with the SoP.

[Fundraising Director]

So, I guess I will be leaving the Board and party. That's OK. Because if we are going to be locked into absurd and unsaleable positions, then I would rather not waste my time.

Thanks.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:26 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry Roger but you are stuck with the SoP.  Make an argument congruent with that or you are basically suggesting that LPCO disaffiliate from the national party.

I can make such an argument for McNukes.  

But bump stocks and high capacity magazines and the like are simply never going to be advocates for ”control.”

You like hard reality.  There it is.

Any talk of advocating nonlibertarian positions is a nonstarter.

AND that is not the business of the Board.

How to tactically promote what our actual positions ARE and positive steps to get there are a different matter.

Anyone kvetching about the foundations beliefs of the Party is on a fools errand.  We are what we are and that's by design.  We are not just better Republicans.  And we are not centrists. This is not me saying this, it is the unchangeable ideology we adopted which is a condition of affiliation with national.

Unless you are suggesting affiliation, its simply NOT an option.

We believe in NO gun control.  We believe that ALL drugs should be legalized... To name a few.  We don't gave to agree on steps or speed to get there (though the LPCO platform does say that).

As the Board you cannot advocate against the Platform.  There is a way to amend.  And considering it was JUST rewritten, that ain't likely.

Angry letters about what we believe are not our problem any more than someone angry that you are taller than they are.

Methodology is where there is lots of board influence.  The Boards job us to uphold our Platform and Bylaws.  It is the delegates job to make changes that don't conflict with the SoP.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM Fundraising Director <fundraisi...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

[Fundraising Director]

" We are not just better Republicans." I am so fucking sick of this argument, which bears absolutely no relationship to reality. ESPECIALLY THESE DAYS. 

And, BTW, Caryn Ann, the Board - of which you are not a member - will discuss whatever the Board decides to discuss.

Thanks.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:26 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry Roger but you are stuck with the SoP.  Make an argument congruent with that or you are basically suggesting that LPCO disaffiliate from the national party.

I can make such an argument for McNukes.  

But bump stocks and high capacity magazines and the like are simply never going to be advocates for ”control.”

You like hard reality.  There it is.

Any talk of advocating nonlibertarian positions is a nonstarter.

AND that is not the business of the Board.

How to tactically promote what our actual positions ARE and positive steps to get there are a different matter.

Anyone kvetching about the foundations beliefs of the Party is on a fools errand.  We are what we are and that's by design.  We are not just better Republicans.  And we are not centrists. This is not me saying this, it is the unchangeable ideology we adopted which is a condition of affiliation with national.

Unless you are suggesting affiliation, its simply NOT an option.

We believe in NO gun control.  We believe that ALL drugs should be legalized... To name a few.  We don't gave to agree on steps or speed to get there (though the LPCO platform does say that).

As the Board you cannot advocate against the Platform.  There is a way to amend.  And considering it was JUST rewritten, that ain't likely.

Angry letters about what we believe are not our problem any more than someone angry that you are taller than they are.

Methodology is where there is lots of board influence.  The Boards job us to uphold our Platform and Bylaws.  It is the delegates job to make changes that don't conflict with the SoP.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:11 PM Fundraising Director <fundraisi...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

[Matt DiGiallonardo LPCO Membership Director]

I wish I could heart react an email, Roger.

Matt DiGiallonardo, LPCO Membership Director

[Matt DiGiallonardo LPCO Membership Director]

How can we accomplish anything in board discussions when members keep interrupting our emails? 

We (board members) can take this to private phone calls where we have privacy, if you'd like, or maybe we can have a peaceful board discussion without distractions? 

Matt DiGiallonardo, LPCO Membership Director

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 2:48 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com wrote:

Roger it is an actual argument.  And of course the Board can overstep its authority.

And as a member I can point it out.

Members have rights in this organization.  We are bottom up.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:46 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

I’m just being honest with you Roger.

We believe literally and absolutely that the government, if any, is limited to rights protection.  That's it.  That is the soul of the LP - solid actual minarchism.

Every Board member signed off on the SoP and the NAP pledge.

What's up for grabs is how we get there and no one has to advocate for the whole thing.  We are a DIRECTIONAL coalition not a destinational one.  The train headed northward that has numerous stops along the way.  But it only goes north.  Not east, west, or south.  And it can stop often on its journey.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:41 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

And that's what I said.

Tactics are open.  

The path is open.

Wayne did PRECISELY THAT in his race.

This isn't new, in fact I suggested that and wrote up a proposal for it in 2017 long before this discussion.

One can do practical politics with a radical end game.  Not only can we, we MUST.  Not a new revelation. The Board over the years lacks follow-through by a portion and unless everyone is at max effectiveness it falls through.

I can go pull out the minutes where I laid out those effective principles 

[Fundraising Director]

Caryn Ann, if you look back through the records of my involvement with the LPCo, when I joined or when I ran for office or when I applied to be a delegate, you will see that I have always been crystal clear that, while I agree with 90% or so of the platform, I have never claimed that I agree with 100% of it. Those are my terms of engagement. And they are an absolute fact. If you don't like them, then feel free to take care whatever action you think appropriate. But the response that "it's not in the SoP and therefore it cannot be considered" is something that I categorically reject.

Discussion is over.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:46 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

I’m just being honest with you Roger.

We believe literally and absolutely that the government, if any, is limited to rights protection.  That's it.  That is the soul of the LP - solid actual minarchism.

Every Board member signed off on the SoP and the NAP pledge.

What's up for grabs is how we get there and no one has to advocate for the whole thing.  We are a DIRECTIONAL coalition not a destinational one.  The train headed northward that has numerous stops along the way.  But it only goes north.  Not east, west, or south.  And it can stop often on its journey.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:41 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

And that's what I said.

Tactics are open.  

The path is open.

Wayne did PRECISELY THAT in his race.

This isn't new, in fact I suggested that and wrote up a proposal for it in 2017 long before this discussion.

One can do practical politics with a radical end game.  Not only can we, we MUST.  Not a new revelation. The Board over the years lacks follow-through by a portion and unless everyone is at max effectiveness it falls through.

I can go pull out the minutes where I laid out those effective principles 

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:36 PM Matt DiGiallonardo LPCO Membership Director <membershi...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

[Matt DiGiallonardo LPCO Membership Director]

You're harming the rights of members to have board discussions which are salient and valuable and can advance the prospects of the party.

This is a waste of time. 

I'm out of this thread. 

Matt DiGiallonardo, LPCO Membership Director

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018, 2:55 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com wrote:

Sorry you want to do things in the dark but the board passed a resolution allowing this.

Members are not distractions.  That is an entirely inappropriate attitude.

Of course you can subvert transparency.  And that is violating the rights of members.

[John Hjersman]

There is one form of gun control that I do support.  As long as it is illegal for a felon (ought to be one convicted of violent crime) to own a gun and to sell a felon a gun, I see no way other than background checks to keep me out of trouble selling a gun.  In anticipation of argument, fuck off.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 3:10 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

I think everyone needs to step back and appreciate the difference between DIRECTIONAL and DESTINATIONAL because there's an awful lot of conflation and category error going on.

But the bottom line.  The Party will never advocate for any gun control or drug criminalization.

No one has to advocate any steps forward.  But no, our bylaws even state that any steps backwards is not acceptable.  We don't care if the baby step is teeeeeeeny as long as it is upward or at worst lateral when there are competing principles - gay marriage is a perfect example.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 3:04 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Matt you obviously don't understand members rights.  This was set up to have these interactions.  Members are not a waste of time.  No one is forcing you to respond or read anything I say.

The Board are not rulers.  You have no right to be free from member scrutiny and input.

No one has to respond.  But you keep choosing to.

I will hold the Board to its quasi contractual obligations.  

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 3:01 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Roger, you are over personalizing.

I don't agree with everything in the platform.  That's your right.  It is not your right to advocate a Party position that is contrary.

When I run there will be several things I will have to say, this is my position, I don't agree with my party here.

Your anger toward me is misplaced.  I have been very measures.  I am holding the Board to its quasi contractual obligations to national and our bulaws.

Please stop directing anger to the messenger.  I have been ultra careful to be bland but direct.  I refuse to blow smoke up your ass.  Im laying out the Nozickian side restraint.

We are DIRECTIONAL.  That means total agreement is not expected.

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:55 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry you want to do things in the dark but the board passed a resolution allowing this.

Members are not distractions.  That is an entirely inappropriate attitude.

Of course you can subvert transparency.  And that is violating the rights of members.

--

John Hjersman

Trea...@lpcolorado.org

[State Chair]

A candidate, or even a board member will, and should, have their own mind. Where we have to be careful is saying something that disagrees with the party position and not saying that "this is my opinion". Up until recently, I was in conflict with the parties position on open borders. When I spoke about it, I was ALWAYS careful to say "this is my opinion". Nobody will agree with the platform in its entirety, but we have to make sure that as board members, we have a duty to tell the public that "this is not the parties position"

Please email me if you have questions.

Wayne Harlos
State Chair

Libertarian Party of Colorado

11757 W Ken Caryl Ave #F124

Littleton CO 80127

www.lpcolorado.org

FB: fb.com/lpcolorado

On Wed, Nov 7, 2018 at 2:36 PM Matt DiGiallonardo LPCO Membership Director <membershi...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

[LP Records]

YES - we need more committees with application procedures, and we should develop more processes.  And we need meetings discussing which committee is handling which process manual revision.  And yes, I'm being way sarcastic.  Getting Marijuana legalization passed, repealing grocery taxes, having candidates elected to local offices.  These are useful uses of our time.  - Mike

On 11/7/18 2:06 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

There is a complete committee proposal for this - lets not have too many chefs in the kitchen.

--
Mike Spalding

Records Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado

[Lance Cayko]

Lee:

Thank  you for your email.  I am so glad to see this part in particular, "At this point I'm willing to get involved - let me know what I can do to help."

We NEED more help.  The most immediate way is to come to our next board meeting on Monday the 12th at 7pm at the Independence institute.  Here's my cell# 303.774.7406 if you can't find it.  We meet in the basement.  Door is open in the back of the building.  From there you could meet all of the board members and hear where we will be focusing our efforts post mid-terms.  What county are you in?  Being an active affiliate member is key.

- Lance

[Lance Cayko]

Lee:

Happy to respond but to put it bluntly unless you get involved, in person, nothing will change.  Can you make it to the board meeting on Monday and what county do you live in so we can help you get involved?

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:15 PM Lee Wenger <weng...@gmail.com> wrote:

Its great to see someone read my rant... I was a little worked up after seeing yet another swing from red to blue and back again where we go back and forth like a whipsaw and the voters keep thinking whoever "the other guys" are will have better answers this time around than they did last time...  Its mindnumbing and I honestly don't understand how we collectively have become so stupidly trapped and are becoming even more entrenched in this futile 2 party system.  Any way, thanks for reading.

I just wanted to make a few additional comments about the list of beliefs you have in your tagline:

Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * 

Non-interventionism * 

Re-Legalize All Drugs * 

End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * 

Repeal All Gun Laws * 

Abolish All Taxation * 

Sound, Free-market Money * 

Abolish The Fed * 

End Corporate & Individual Welfare * 

Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax * 

Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * 

Free-market Emergency Services * 

Open Migration * 

Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector * 

Eliminate Regulation * 

Hopefully, you realize that this list of beliefs virtually guarantees that you'll never have a viable candidate nor win any major office.  Its fine to have this list of beliefs personally but this specifically is what I'm talking about when I say pragmatic vs idealistic... you have to change the direction of the boat slowly... you can't ever change the direction of the boat if you're not in the wheelhouse.  Honestly, I need to know if the Party is going to stick by this list of "beliefs" or if there is room to make a softer list that won't scare off 98% of the potential voters.  If I had to picture a person in my mind that would create a list like this they would look a lot like Ted Kaczynski or David Koresh.  This list has to make people feel like they've found a home, a place that really understands them, and maybe that's your intent but right now its not having that effect, not on me at least.  It also makes me believe more strongly that there is no seriousness in having a party that can actually have an impact and win some elections and maybe actually make a difference.  This isn't about me obviously, but I think if you use that list to find your mesh set you are way more of an extremist and fringe party than I previously thought.  I believe that the stance has to change if you expect to grow beyond a small relatively radical (and politically irrelevant) foothold.  I mean do you want to be the party of the nutso extremist or do you want to be relevant?  Don't start the conversation with "what do we believe" but rather how can we adopt a platform that can grow.

By the way, nowhere in that list was any mention of Healthcare.  I completely believe that Healthcare will be the major topic in 2020.  If the party has any expectations of making ground you will absolutely have to have a winning position wrt Healthcare.  https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/07/healthcare-topped-the-economy-as-the-biggest-issue-for-voters-now-heres-why.html

Again, I'm nobody, I'm sure you guys think I'm a lunatic, couldn't care less btw, but what I'm trying to tell you is that I believe that there is an opportunity for a legitimate third party if you don't scare off all your potential membership.  

Thanks,

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 11:19 AM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Mike is right.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LPCO-open-business" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lpco-open-busin...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lpco-open...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lpco-open-business/CAENsuciGnoTg9y%3DxzJor1sHRX2cGiFw8E-E1YW9WeVJ-23Ws9g%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

  In Liberty,

Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Har...@LP.org or Secr...@LP.org.

Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPe...@LP.org

Call me at 561.523.2250 and follow my public figure page at facebook.com/pinkflameofliberty/

=========================================================================

Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Non-interventionism * Re-Legalize All Drugs * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun Laws * Abolish All Taxation * Sound, Free-market Money * Abolish The Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish The IRS and Repeal the Income Tax * Privatize Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services * Open Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation * 

VOTE LIBERTARIAN * 800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org

=========================================================================

--

Lee Wenger

Associate Broker, REALTOR

303.882.6442 | weng...@gmail.com

www.EquityColoradoRealEstate.com

[Matt DiGiallonardo LPCO Membership Director]

Lee, the way I see it, is we need footsoldiers and text messengers and candidates and donors (sorry for the Vonnegut-esque overuse of "and") who want to find any quantifiable way to reduce government. 

That's the party which I hope to build. When the government gets too small for you, feel free to hop off, but I believe we all agree there is far too much government in our lives, and there has been for a very long time. 

Thanks for taking the time to reach out!

Matt DiGiallonardo, LPCO Membership Director

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018, 6:26 PM Lee Wenger <weng...@gmail.com wrote:

I'm afraid that what I'm hearing is that a 50-year-old set of dogmatic principles is more important than relevancy.  You can explain to me for hours, days or years why the belief foundations are important but if enough of the electorate doesn't share that set of principals and you can't convince them of this core belief structure it really is truly irrelevant.  I guess I'll keep looking for a third party that wants to be relevant and is willing to prioritize that over a rigid and inflexible set of principals.  Don't get me wrong i'm not suggesting principals aren't important but I strongly believe that without more election impact that no one knows or cares about those principals.  So, I believe principals need to be made child size so they can be digested.  You can tell me I'm wrong but 50 years of adherence to these principals have not benefited the party in reality - they're simply inedible to too many. 

Part of the purpose of my writing and continuing to write was to determine if I was talking to the Scientologist, if you know what I mean, and unfortunately, it appears that I am.  You have answered my question - I really don't think this is a good use of my time.

When you guys decide that having an impact is more important than worshiping Xenu please let me know, would love to help.

Thanks

*Lance, just so you don't think I'm ignoring your question I live in Arapahoe County, in Littleton, to be specific.

**yes, I know you're not Scientologist (at least I hope you're not), its just a metaphor

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:30 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <carynan...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Lee, if you like you can call me.  But the short answer is this:

Candidates must and should have forward intermediate steps to our goals.  Shouting goals without a plan is futile.

Similarly hiding what the goal is as well.

The incomplete list in my tagline is not negotiable.  It hasn’t been since 1972.  That doesn’t mean each member must hold all (though the list is a consistent conclusion of our guiding principle - the non-initiation of force) many only after on one or two, but the Party holds all the below and these beliefs are implanted into our Bylaws with an amendment threshold that is for all intents and purposes impossible to change.

I would like to explain why but that takes personal back and forth.

I would welcome a phone call or perhaps you and I and my husband, the LPCO State Chair, can have coffee or a drink.

And I will add completely free market in healthcare to my tagline.

Thank you so much.

Mike is right.

--

[John Hjersman]

Lee.  I agree with you.  It is my hope that eventually it will dawn that there's a huge pool of potential members out there who cherish liberty but aren't keen on "burn it down" radicalism.  At that point, perhaps the sacrosanct principles will be softened to attract moderate libertarians and bore the dildo-waving morons enough to go start their own party.

John Hjersman

On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 9:05 PM Marc Montoni <wel...@lpcolorado.org> wrote:

Mr Wenger,

On 11/8/18, Lee Wenger <weng...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm afraid that what I'm hearing is that a 50-year-old set of dogmatic
> principles is more important than relevancy.

Actually you're in luck because 99 % of all Libertarian candidates run
promoting ideas that to be honest would result in little shrinking of
government.

Gary Johnson, for instance, had his own "list": The Fair Tax.  Federal
enemies lists.  Continuing the prohibition on all drugs except the one
he likes (marijuana).

I didn't particularly care for his particular list but still carried
his petition in Virginia, voted for him, and raised some money for
him.

> but if enough

> of the electorate doesn't share that set of principals and you can't
> convince them of this core belief structure it really is truly irrelevant.

My suggestion here is that our market is there but we have failed to
pursue it because for the entire forty years of our existence, most of
our candidates have been telling people we're a lighter-duty version
of the Democrats and Republicans.

> I guess I'll keep looking for a third party that wants to be relevant and
> is willing to prioritize that over a rigid and inflexible set of
> principals.

The best way to be relevant sans principle is to join and run under
the D or R banner.  Third parties exist to give voice to ideas that
the "relevant" parties refuse to address.

> important but I strongly believe that without more election impact that no
> one knows or cares about those principals.  So, I believe principals need
> to be made child size so they can be digested.  You can tell me I'm wrong
> but 50 years of adherence to these principals have not benefited the party
> in reality - they're simply inedible to too many.

As stated above, there hasn't been 50 years of adherence to our
principles.  Almost all Libertarian candidates since 1972 have spoken
very gently and offered child-sized bites of reform -- and they have
gotten typically 3%.

> Part of the purpose of my writing and continuing to write was to determine
> if I was talking to the Scientologist, if you know what I mean, and
> unfortunately, it appears that I am.  You have answered my question - I
> really don't think this is a good use of my time.

Well, if that's your way of saying that we must change our ideology to
suit yours or you won't participate, then you've made it into a
self-fulfilling prophecy.

Please meet with Wayne and Caryn Ann and get to know some actual
Libertarians in person.

BTW Caryn Ann stole that list from me, and I intend to continue using
it as it says where I stand.  Thank you, though, for the suggestion
that it address health.  Mine does now.

--
Marc Montoni
New Member Committee, Libertarian Party of Colorado

Activist * Advocate * Volunteer * Life Member, Libertarian Party - www.LP.org

Home mailing address: PO Box 1392, Clifton CO  81520-1392
http://www.LPColorado.org/
http://www.facebook.com/LPColorado/
804-592-6066 or Wel...@LPColorado.org

My home county: Mesa County Libertarians: https://www.facebook.com/LPCOMesaCo/

=====================================================================
Peaceful Commerce With All Nations * Noninterventionism * Repeal
Prohibition * End Government Intrusion In The Bedroom * Repeal All Gun
Laws * Taxpayer Bailout: Repeal The Income Tax * Sound, Free-market
Money & Abolish The Fed * End Corporate & Individual Welfare * Abolish
The IRS * Eliminate all Meddling in Health Care * Privatize

Transportation Infrastructure * Free-market Emergency Services *

Minimally-regulated Migration * Transfer Government Schools To The

Private Sector * Eliminate Regulation * VOTE LIBERTARIAN *
800-ELECT-US or http://www.LP.org
=====================================================================

--

John Hjersman

Trea...@lpcolorado.org

[Fundraising Director]

"My suggestion here is that our market is there but we have failed to
pursue it because for the entire forty years of our existence, most of
our candidates have been telling people we're a lighter-duty version
of the Democrats and Republicans."

This is the continuous assertion of certain members of our party. It would be nice to see some actual evidence to support this assertion, which is always only based on self-inspection for a very atypical population. Personally, I think that this statement is completely delusional both in judging the reason for our failure to achieve electoral success and in judging the distance between the LP and the other parties.

Adherents of this view: how do you explain the likes of Justin Amash, Tom Massie, Ron Paul, Rand Paul, etc? Did any of them advocate complete drug legalization or the removal of all gun bans? Yet, they got elected (and re-elected) on policy grounds that truly were "a lighter-duty version of the Democrats and Republicans." So, what explains their success? How did they tap into this latent reservoir of libertarian voters without going full anarcho-capitalist? And, if our policies are just ""a lighter-duty version of the Democrats and Republicans," then why are they hated by the leadership of the Republican party even though they are less radical than the LP?

This dog won't hunt. And, if this is your preference, then I have no desire to waste my time as a fellow hunter.

[Fundraising Director]

Amen brother. I am going to do my best to make this the content of Monday's meeting. I will not waste more time, money and energy only to have these efforts undermined by this type of nonsense.

Roger