Ron,
If I understand, you're saying it's not necessary to have any signatures to use the petition as an entree to speak to various community groups. If this be the case, then IMO this alone is enough to make it worthwhile.
Best, Michael
Dear Dr. Mike as opsed to Wine Mike and UCSF Mike;
YES!!! You are absolutely correct!!! You use the Police Petition as an entree to the groups - then present who we are what we stand for and what we don't stand for and why we are doing it then present the Police Petition for approval and signatures.
TAH DAH!!!
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
P.S. AND almost forgot - having on hand some handout literature and even voter registration forms as well!!! Don't you just love it when a plan comes together!!!!
Biiiinnnngggo!
Dear Ron, next step to cast your list of groups in stone and ask for
committed volunteers to speak at each?
Marcy
--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@...>
wrote:
Dear Dr. Mike as opsed to Wine Mike and UCSF Mike;
YES!!! You are absolutely correct!!! You use the Police Petition as
an entree to the groups - then present who we are what we stand for
and what we don't stand for and why we are doing it then present the
Police Petition for approval and signatures.
TAH DAH!!!
Ron Getty
SF LibertarianP.S. AND almost forgot - having on hand some handout literature and
even voter registration forms as well!!! Don't you just love it when
a plan comes together!!!!
From: dredelstein@...
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 4:24:02 PM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB ChieftainRon,
If I understand, you're saying it's not necessary to have any
signatures to use the petition as an entree to speak to various
community groups. If this be the case, then IMO this alone is enough
to make it worthwhile.
Best, Michael
From: Ron Getty
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 4:41 PM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB ChieftainDear Dr. Mike;
You wrote in part: Clever strategy. Approximately how many
signatures do you estimate we'd need to be afforded these
opportunities for appearances and presenting libertarianism?
A clarification on what you are asking - I'm sort of lost at what
your question is.
The presentations before community groups would be to garner
support and signatures for the Police Petition AND at the same time
present why we as Libertarians would espose such a course based on on
core beliefs and what the core beliefs are and what they mean to the
people we are speaking before. The old sales tactic of : What's In It
For The Customer - and why they should buy - what's it mean to me and
so on.
As far as signatures gathered in quantities large enough I would
love to have 100,000 or even 250,000. I do have some ideas on how to
do wide spread signature petition gathering some are zero expense
based some are expensive.
But this is not practical until we have an indication of actual co-
sponsor support and who or whom is willing to co-sponsor and
willingness to gather petition signatures and so on. This of
necessity would have to include the Democratic Party - Republican
Party and Greens. Major community groups would have to be on board
and even if possible the Chamber of Commerce and other community
chamber groups. Small business groups and all those lovely small pop
up like mushroom neighborhood community groups. Signatures at Green
Cross Medical Marijuana Centers and so on.
Minimally to have any impact I would have to have at least 25,000 -
50,000 signatures. This would be enough to raise an eye brow or two
at City Hall and with the SFPD.
Anything less is not worth the effort.
Ron Getty
SF Libertariandredelstein@... wrote:
Ron,You wrote:
"It's getting an opportunity to appear before various community
groups and present not only the Police Petition but the why's and
where's of it from a LIbertarian position and what's Libertarianism
and how we arrived at the Petition. To where do we find the police to
do this by removing them from victimless crimes and other non-
essential duties."
Clever strategy.
Approximately how many signatures do you estimate we'd need to be
afforded these opportunities for appearances and presenting
libertarianism?
Best, Michael
From: Ron Getty
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 11:23 AM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain FindsDear Dr. Mike;
That's also part of the whole Police Petition thing. It's getting
an opportunity to appear before various community groups and present
not only the Police Petition but the why's and where's of it from a
LIbertarian position and what's Libertarianism and how we arrived at
the Petition. To where do we find the police to do this by removing
them from victimless crimes and other non-essential duties.
As example, shortly 42 SFPD officers will be patrolling middle and
high schools. If the schools need armed security guards pay for that
from the school budget. Secondly, if the schools are really that bad
then the school board school adminstrators and middle and high school
principals should be fired for gross dereleiction of duty and fraud.
The SFPD issued 1,860 citations for panhandling and sleeping on the
sidewalks, as well as 11,000 "quality of life" tickets.
Don't you just feel safer already with this aggressive ticketing
tactics against the homeless? I' m certain killers rapists robbers
are quaking in their shoes.
Ron Getty
SF Libertariandredelstein@... wrote:
Ron,You wrote:
> To do what would be needed we would basically have to fire
> the SFPD - and that ain't gonna happenI agree, my idea ain't gonna happen.
Unfortunately, neither is yours.
Consequently, we're not talking about getting my idea or yours to
happen, but rather educating the undiscovered natural libertarians in
SF about one of our principles and that the LPSF exists.
Putting more Govt police on violent crime duty may make sense (I'm
not arguing here pro or con). However, it does not illustrate a clear
libertarian principle, whereas taking the cops off victimless crime
duty does.
Best, Michael
From: Ron Getty
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 8:40 PM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain FindsDear Dr. Mike;
What you say is quite truthful and does represent a genuine
quandary and quondrum. Until we can get private police hired by
ourselves to protect ourselves we are stuck on using what we have BUT
we can direct their activities. If we very vigorously force the
issue.
To do what would be needed we would basically have to fire the
SFPD - and that ain't gonna happen - too many politicians. To use an
example when an officer gets killed in the line of duty hundreds of
police officers show up in tribute along with the usual gaggle of
politicians.
How many police officers show up when an innocent civilian is
killed by the police in tribute to the fallen victim of the police
when their funeral is held? How about zero unless you count the cops
ticketing parked cars at the funeral.
I would much rather prefer Murray Rothbard's version of the police
any day.
However, what has transpired is an organization formed to "protect"
us has become institutionalized. And as a result the police here or
anywhere serves to preserve protect and defend itself and its
activities to its betterment against the greater good of the public
who through taxes pays the police their pay.
Not too far back the police here in San Francisco went on strike.
Yet the City did not fall to pieces with massive amounts of robberies
and murders and so on happening. When a judge issued an injunction
against the strike the process server was given the run around by the
striking police officers.
Why do the police need a union? It's for their betterment not the
citizens. Look at the current memorandum of understanding and read
how seniority takes precedent over experience, expertise and
capabilities. It's a pure union agreement for the good of the police
not the good of the citizens paying them.
Yes you're right it would be better if we could make the change
happen. Sadly we can't change it without a major change in the
bellweather of how and why the police have become the police and how
we use them to enforce the useless laws the Morons of Sacramento and
Mordor keep spewing out.
And to borrow a very Asian saying: To make the changes needed in
how we use the police in their current utilitarian environment we
would have to break the rice bowls of the politicians and the police.
Ron Getty
SF Libertariandredelstein@... wrote:
Ron,I appreciate your cheers in support of my advocacy of state-hating,
which I take--along with your eloquent emails--as a clear sign you
also have a healthy hatred of this evil institution.
If so, please help me understand how an unashamed state-hater such
as yourself can advocate (in your Petition) this same institution
further empower its agents, viz., the police, to "protect" us against
private violent "criminals."
Are not the Govt police vulnerable to the same perverse incentives
of monopoly power as are all other state agents whose functioning you
hate? Don't the Govt police use their privileged position to advance
their own selfish interests at the expense of the powerless innocent
citizens upon whom they prey?
As you know, I applaud the rest of your petition, recommending the
removal of the police from prosecuting consensual acts between adults.
Best, Michael
From: Ron Getty
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain FindsDear Dr. Mike;
Kudos! Bravo! Encore! Take A Bow!
Ron Getty
SF Libertariandredelstein@... wrote:
Bob,I understand your feelings against hate-Bush and ridicule-Bush
emails.
However, IMHO hate-the-state pieces and ridicule-the-state writing
is necessary and healthy to remind us we are dealing with a vicious
institution, a parasitic leviathan consisting of predatory murderers,
hell-bent on depriving us of our freedom, ultimately enslaving us and
worse.
Consider Hayek's title "The Road to Serfdom" and Nock's "Our Enemy,
the State."
Murray Rothbard makes the case in "Do You Hate the State?", that
which divides libertarians is not anarchy vs. minarchy, but rather a
passionate hatred of the state and statism vs. a placid displeasure
with it.
Rothbard observes:
"...think of our classical liberal forbears who were genuinely
radical, who hated statism and the States of their day with
a beautifully integrated passion: the Levellers, Patrick Henry,
Tom Paine, Joseph Priestley, the Jacksonians, Richard
Cobden, and on and on, a veritable roll call of the greats of
the past. Tom Paine's radical hatred of the State and statism
was and is far more important to the cause of liberty than the
fact that he never crossed the divide between laissez-faire
and anarchism."Best, Michael
From: Robert Parkhurst
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 10:39 PM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain Finds Home at
Homeland Security
Dear Ron,
I think you would do much better if you would just get serious. I
can read hate Bush literature in the Chronicle, New York Times or any
other left wing rag. If you have any serious comments put them
forward or I would rather just go read the New York Times.
Bob Parkhurst
From: Ron Getty
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: 5/16/2006 8:00:29 PM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain Finds Home at
Homeland Security
Dear Steve,
Why would that surprise anyone?
Just look at the name of the agency itself - Homeland Security.
That is straight out of East Europe and Hitler's - Der Vaterland or
Russia's - Rodina - Mother Russia.
This despite the fact no one I know has ever referred to Amercia as
the Homeland. Or if someone is on vacation overseas - do they say
gosh it sure will be great to get back to the Homeland. DO'H.
It's just another step in creating a Neo-fascist empire in Amerika
with everyone having an RFID chip embedded in their arms so they can
be tracked wherever they go and whatever they do.
Seig Heil Busch! Seig Heil Busch! Sie Heil Busch!
All praise our Beloved Der Fuhrer Busch!!!
Doesn't that just ring so right as the Bell of Liberty is melted
down into bus tokens?
Ron Getty
SF LibertarianSteve Dekorte <steve@...> wrote:
(DV) Whitney: KGB Chieftain Finds Home at Homeland Security
-- Steve
SPONSORED LINKS U s government grant U s government student loan
California politics
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
Dear Marcy;
I am working on that community list. And I agree we need people who can be committed - in more ways than one(heh heh)
But yes you is correct like Dr. Mike is correct. Let the trolling for signatures begin. And list building begin.
Ahem - Once the final Police Petition version is approved by the LPSF at the June 10 meeting.
This means more than just the Democratic And Republican and Green Parties of SF. It also means newspapers Exam - Chron - Guardian - SF Weekly - Bay Reporter - Chambers of Commerce large and local and neighborhood - and other various community groups - church groups and local party groups and all self-appointed political groups.
Yawohl Frau Berry?
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
Dear Ron,
Frau Berry is committed (or should be). Looking forward to the list
of groups and a go ahead vote from the membership at our next meeting.
Marcy
--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@...>
wrote:
Dear Marcy;
I am working on that community list. And I agree we need people who
can be committed - in more ways than one(heh heh)
But yes you is correct like Dr. Mike is correct. Let the trolling
for signatures begin. And list building begin.
Ahem - Once the final Police Petition version is approved by the
LPSF at the June 10 meeting.
This means more than just the Democratic And Republican and Green
Parties of SF. It also means newspapers Exam - Chron - Guardian - SF
Weekly - Bay Reporter - Chambers of Commerce large and local and
neighborhood - and other various community groups - church groups and
local party groups and all self-appointed political groups.
Yawohl Frau Berry?
Ron Getty
SF LibertarianFrom: Amarcy D. Berry <amarcyb@...>
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 6:25:08 PM
Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: Article: KGB ChieftainBiiiinnnngggo!
Dear Ron, next step to cast your list of groups in stone and ask
for
committed volunteers to speak at each?
Marcy
--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@>
wrote:
>
> Dear Dr. Mike as opsed to Wine Mike and UCSF Mike;
>
> YES!!! You are absolutely correct!!! You use the Police Petition
as
an entree to the groups - then present who we are what we stand for
and what we don't stand for and why we are doing it then present
the
Police Petition for approval and signatures.
>
> TAH DAH!!!
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> P.S. AND almost forgot - having on hand some handout literature
and
even voter registration forms as well!!! Don't you just love it
when
a plan comes together!!!!
>
>
> From: dredelstein@
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2006 4:24:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain
>
>
> Ron,
>
> If I understand, you're saying it's not necessary to have any
signatures to use the petition as an entree to speak to various
community groups. If this be the case, then IMO this alone is
enough
to make it worthwhile.
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Ron Getty
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 4:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain
>
>
> Dear Dr. Mike;
>
> You wrote in part: Clever strategy. Approximately how many
signatures do you estimate we'd need to be afforded these
opportunities for appearances and presenting libertarianism?
>
>
> A clarification on what you are asking - I'm sort of lost at what
your question is.
>
> The presentations before community groups would be to garner
support and signatures for the Police Petition AND at the same time
present why we as Libertarians would espose such a course based on
on
core beliefs and what the core beliefs are and what they mean to
the
people we are speaking before. The old sales tactic of : What's In
It
For The Customer - and why they should buy - what's it mean to me
and
so on.
>
> As far as signatures gathered in quantities large enough I would
love to have 100,000 or even 250,000. I do have some ideas on how
to
do wide spread signature petition gathering some are zero expense
based some are expensive.
>
> But this is not practical until we have an indication of actual
co-
sponsor support and who or whom is willing to co-sponsor and
willingness to gather petition signatures and so on. This of
necessity would have to include the Democratic Party - Republican
Party and Greens. Major community groups would have to be on board
and even if possible the Chamber of Commerce and other community
chamber groups. Small business groups and all those lovely small
pop
up like mushroom neighborhood community groups. Signatures at Green
Cross Medical Marijuana Centers and so on.
>
> Minimally to have any impact I would have to have at least
25,000 -
50,000 signatures. This would be enough to raise an eye brow or two
at City Hall and with the SFPD.
>
> Anything less is not worth the effort.
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> dredelstein@ wrote:
> Ron,
>
> You wrote:
> "It's getting an opportunity to appear before various community
groups and present not only the Police Petition but the why's and
where's of it from a LIbertarian position and what's Libertarianism
and how we arrived at the Petition. To where do we find the police
to
do this by removing them from victimless crimes and other non-
essential duties."
>
> Clever strategy.
>
> Approximately how many signatures do you estimate we'd need to be
afforded these opportunities for appearances and presenting
libertarianism?
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Ron Getty
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, May 19, 2006 11:23 AM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain Finds
>
>
> Dear Dr. Mike;
>
> That's also part of the whole Police Petition thing. It's getting
an opportunity to appear before various community groups and
present
not only the Police Petition but the why's and where's of it from a
LIbertarian position and what's Libertarianism and how we arrived
at
the Petition. To where do we find the police to do this by removing
them from victimless crimes and other non-essential duties.
>
> As example, shortly 42 SFPD officers will be patrolling middle
and
high schools. If the schools need armed security guards pay for
that
from the school budget. Secondly, if the schools are really that
bad
then the school board school adminstrators and middle and high
school
principals should be fired for gross dereleiction of duty and fraud.
>
> The SFPD issued 1,860 citations for panhandling and sleeping on
the
sidewalks, as well as 11,000 "quality of life" tickets.
>
> Don't you just feel safer already with this aggressive ticketing
tactics against the homeless? I' m certain killers rapists robbers
are quaking in their shoes.
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> dredelstein@ wrote:
> Ron,
>
> You wrote:
> > To do what would be needed we would basically have to fire
> > the SFPD - and that ain't gonna happen
>
> I agree, my idea ain't gonna happen.
>
> Unfortunately, neither is yours.
>
> Consequently, we're not talking about getting my idea or yours to
happen, but rather educating the undiscovered natural libertarians
in
SF about one of our principles and that the LPSF exists.
>
> Putting more Govt police on violent crime duty may make sense
(I'm
not arguing here pro or con). However, it does not illustrate a
clear
libertarian principle, whereas taking the cops off victimless crime
duty does.
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Ron Getty
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 8:40 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain Finds
>
>
> Dear Dr. Mike;
>
> What you say is quite truthful and does represent a genuine
quandary and quondrum. Until we can get private police hired by
ourselves to protect ourselves we are stuck on using what we have
BUT
we can direct their activities. If we very vigorously force the
issue.
>
> To do what would be needed we would basically have to fire the
SFPD - and that ain't gonna happen - too many politicians. To use
an
example when an officer gets killed in the line of duty hundreds of
police officers show up in tribute along with the usual gaggle of
politicians.
>
> How many police officers show up when an innocent civilian is
killed by the police in tribute to the fallen victim of the police
when their funeral is held? How about zero unless you count the
cops
ticketing parked cars at the funeral.
>
> I would much rather prefer Murray Rothbard's version of the
police
any day.
>
> However, what has transpired is an organization formed
to "protect"
us has become institutionalized. And as a result the police here or
anywhere serves to preserve protect and defend itself and its
activities to its betterment against the greater good of the public
who through taxes pays the police their pay.
>
> Not too far back the police here in San Francisco went on strike.
Yet the City did not fall to pieces with massive amounts of
robberies
and murders and so on happening. When a judge issued an injunction
against the strike the process server was given the run around by
the
striking police officers.
>
> Why do the police need a union? It's for their betterment not the
citizens. Look at the current memorandum of understanding and read
how seniority takes precedent over experience, expertise and
capabilities. It's a pure union agreement for the good of the
police
not the good of the citizens paying them.
>
> Yes you're right it would be better if we could make the change
happen. Sadly we can't change it without a major change in the
bellweather of how and why the police have become the police and
how
we use them to enforce the useless laws the Morons of Sacramento
and
Mordor keep spewing out.
>
> And to borrow a very Asian saying: To make the changes needed in
how we use the police in their current utilitarian environment we
would have to break the rice bowls of the politicians and the
police.
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> dredelstein@ wrote:
> Ron,
>
> I appreciate your cheers in support of my advocacy of state-
hating,
which I take--along with your eloquent emails--as a clear sign you
also have a healthy hatred of this evil institution.
>
> If so, please help me understand how an unashamed state-hater
such
as yourself can advocate (in your Petition) this same institution
further empower its agents, viz., the police, to "protect" us
against
private violent "criminals."
>
> Are not the Govt police vulnerable to the same perverse
incentives
of monopoly power as are all other state agents whose functioning
you
hate? Don't the Govt police use their privileged position to
advance
their own selfish interests at the expense of the powerless
innocent
citizens upon whom they prey?
>
> As you know, I applaud the rest of your petition, recommending
the
removal of the police from prosecuting consensual acts between
adults.
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Ron Getty
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2006 9:34 AM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain Finds
>
>
> Dear Dr. Mike;
>
> Kudos! Bravo! Encore! Take A Bow!
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
>
> dredelstein@ wrote:
> Bob,
>
> I understand your feelings against hate-Bush and ridicule-Bush
emails.
>
> However, IMHO hate-the-state pieces and ridicule-the-state
writing
is necessary and healthy to remind us we are dealing with a vicious
institution, a parasitic leviathan consisting of predatory
murderers,
hell-bent on depriving us of our freedom, ultimately enslaving us
and
worse.
>
> Consider Hayek's title "The Road to Serfdom" and Nock's "Our
Enemy,
the State."
>
> Murray Rothbard makes the case in "Do You Hate the State?", that
which divides libertarians is not anarchy vs. minarchy, but rather
a
passionate hatred of the state and statism vs. a placid displeasure
with it.
>
> Rothbard observes:
> "...think of our classical liberal forbears who were genuinely
> radical, who hated statism and the States of their day with
> a beautifully integrated passion: the Levellers, Patrick Henry,
> Tom Paine, Joseph Priestley, the Jacksonians, Richard
> Cobden, and on and on, a veritable roll call of the greats of
> the past. Tom Paine's radical hatred of the State and statism
> was and is far more important to the cause of liberty than the
> fact that he never crossed the divide between laissez-faire
> and anarchism."
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Robert Parkhurst
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2006 10:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain Finds Home at
Homeland Security
>
>
> Dear Ron,
> I think you would do much better if you would just get serious. I
can read hate Bush literature in the Chronicle, New York Times or
any
other left wing rag. If you have any serious comments put them
forward or I would rather just go read the New York Times.
> Bob Parkhurst
>
>
> From: Ron Getty
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: 5/16/2006 8:00:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Article: KGB Chieftain Finds Home at
Homeland Security
>
>
> Dear Steve,
>
> Why would that surprise anyone?
>
> Just look at the name of the agency itself - Homeland Security.
That is straight out of East Europe and Hitler's - Der Vaterland or
Russia's - Rodina - Mother Russia.
>
> This despite the fact no one I know has ever referred to Amercia
as
the Homeland. Or if someone is on vacation overseas - do they say
gosh it sure will be great to get back to the Homeland. DO'H.
>
> It's just another step in creating a Neo-fascist empire in
Amerika
with everyone having an RFID chip embedded in their arms so they
can
be tracked wherever they go and whatever they do.
>
> Seig Heil Busch! Seig Heil Busch! Sie Heil Busch!
>
> All praise our Beloved Der Fuhrer Busch!!!
>
> Doesn't that just ring so right as the Bell of Liberty is melted
down into bus tokens?
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
>
> Steve Dekorte <steve@> wrote:
>
> (DV) Whitney: KGB Chieftain Finds Home at Homeland Security
>
> -- Steve
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS U s government grant U s government student loan
California politics
>
>
>
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
> Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>SPONSORED LINKS
U s government grant U s government student loan California
politics
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "lpsf-discuss" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
lpsf-discuss-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.