libertarian president in 2016 / parade, etc.

Discussion
1

LPSF,

If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish America had more
bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme Court Justice Ruth
Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris and President
George W. Bush.

Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and things that make
their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative, Religious-rightist stomachs
do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving peaceful people
and private property alone, they advocate and use the unconstitutional force
of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful people and private
property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of supporters, all
agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the solution is always more
government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist mode of thinking and
destructive, unconstitutional form of government.

To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated dislike of the gay
lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That point being: To
take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no importance compared
to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government regulation and
involvement with issues of any type, including controversial issues. Doug Newman's
point to the Religious-Right is this: The only way to get government out of
your affairs is to also advocate getting government out of the affairs of people
outside your group, including the lives of peaceful people that make your
stomach's do 360's.

No group of people, including Libertarians, will ever be in unanimous
agreement on any issue, therefore, it is far more important and unifying for
Libertarians to stand united on principal against government regulation and
involvement in peaceful people's affairs. Because Doug Newman promotes the idea of
across-the-board, less government (therefore more freedom), I welcome Doug
Newman to the Libertarian Party.

All the best,

Don Fields

2

I would like to once again agree with Don on the matter of unity in
the LP against government intrusion in our private lives. And since
we are on the general subject of what might be appropriate
response/action by LPSF, as a group, to the current political
landscape, I would also like to invite everybody to come the the next
LPSF monthly meeting on July 9 (Round Table Pizza on 16th Ave and
Geary, room upstairs, 3:00 pm), when we will be discussing and
formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our
constituency, how do we reach our constituency.

Regards,

Marcy

LPSF,

If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish America had

more

bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme

Court Justice Ruth

Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris and

President

George W. Bush.

Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and things

that make

their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative, Religious-

rightist stomachs

do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving

peaceful people

and private property alone, they advocate and use the

unconstitutional force

of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful people and

private

property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of

supporters, all

agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the solution is

always more

government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist mode

of thinking and

destructive, unconstitutional form of government.

To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated dislike of

the gay

lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That point

being: To

take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no

importance compared

to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government regulation

and

involvement with issues of any type, including controversial

issues. Doug Newman's

point to the Religious-Right is this: The only way to get

government out of

your affairs is to also advocate getting government out of the

affairs of people

outside your group, including the lives of peaceful people that

make your

stomach's do 360's.

No group of people, including Libertarians, will ever be in

unanimous

agreement on any issue, therefore, it is far more important and

unifying for

Libertarians to stand united on principal against government

regulation and

involvement in peaceful people's affairs. Because Doug Newman

promotes the idea of

across-the-board, less government (therefore more freedom), I

welcome Doug

3

Marcy,

  Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our constituency," I'd like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively by actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our constituency.

  What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts? Most recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a decriminalization initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up with our own.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

4

And our constituency is?? Starchild, you know that I totally agree
with your principle of doing rather than talking. The proposed
discussion got on the agenda as a result of my noticing that EBL has
an annual strategy/planning meeting, Rich Newell suggested the topic
of constituency-based outreach (vs. issues-based outreach), and
Michael Edelstein thought a 15 minute discussion might be worthwhile
(which I agree). So, if you come up with an activity, we will do it
during the Activity slot in the agenda (how about writing down some
spots to film for our upcoming Public Access TV series, "A Walk Down
the Streets of a Once Free City.") But I would like to see what
happens when we ask ourselves "Who is our constituency, if anybody?"

Marcy

Marcy,

  Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who we

are as a

group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our constituency,"

I'd

like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively by
actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our
constituency.

  What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts?

Most

recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a decriminalization
initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up

with

our own.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

> I would like to once again agree with Don on the matter of unity

in

> the LP against government intrusion in our private lives. And

since

> we are on the general subject of what might be appropriate
> response/action by LPSF, as a group, to the current political
> landscape, I would also like to invite everybody to come the the

next

> LPSF monthly meeting on July 9 (Round Table Pizza on 16th Ave and
> Geary, room upstairs, 3:00 pm), when we will be discussing and
> formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our
> constituency, how do we reach our constituency.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marcy
>
>
>
>>
>> LPSF,
>>
>> If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish America

had

> more
>> bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme
> Court Justice Ruth
>> Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris

and

> President
>> George W. Bush.
>>
>> Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and things
> that make
>> their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative, Religious-
> rightist stomachs
>> do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving
> peaceful people
>> and private property alone, they advocate and use the
> unconstitutional force
>> of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful people

and

> private
>> property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of
> supporters, all
>> agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the solution is
> always more
>> government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist mode
> of thinking and
>> destructive, unconstitutional form of government.
>>
>> To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated dislike

of

> the gay
>> lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That point
> being: To
>> take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no
> importance compared
>> to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government

regulation

5

Dear Everyone;

Based on my own personal experience I have to ask the following.

Who in San Francisco knows there is such a thing as the Libertarian Party? I found the Libertarian Party by total accident. If I had known there was such a party and what it stood for I would have been a registered Libertarian voter 15 years ago!

So personally I believe you need to ask what can be done to define who a potential Libertarian may be and how do you let them know there is a Libertarian Party and what it stands for? This way you can start to define a constituency. Then once you have defined the constituency then you can create activities to attract their attention to introduce them, to the Libertarian Party.

Based on my background which involves various sorts of sales marketing and advertising what you have is a niche market to go after. How do you go after this niche market - where is it located - what will attract it's attention? etc etc etc

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:
And our constituency is?? Starchild, you know that I totally agree
with your principle of doing rather than talking. The proposed
discussion got on the agenda as a result of my noticing that EBL has
an annual strategy/planning meeting, Rich Newell suggested the topic
of constituency-based outreach (vs. issues-based outreach), and
Michael Edelstein thought a 15 minute discussion might be worthwhile
(which I agree). So, if you come up with an activity, we will do it
during the Activity slot in the agenda (how about writing down some
spots to film for our upcoming Public Access TV series, "A Walk Down
the Streets of a Once Free City.") But I would like to see what
happens when we ask ourselves "Who is our constituency, if anybody?"

Marcy

Marcy,

      Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who we

are as a

group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our constituency,"

I'd

like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively by
actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our
constituency.

      What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts?

Most

recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a decriminalization
initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up

with

our own.

Yours in liberty,
                        <<< Starchild >>>

> I would like to once again agree with Don on the matter of unity

in

> the LP against government intrusion in our private lives. And

since

> we are on the general subject of what might be appropriate
> response/action by LPSF, as a group, to the current political
> landscape, I would also like to invite everybody to come the the

next

> LPSF monthly meeting on July 9 (Round Table Pizza on 16th Ave and
> Geary, room upstairs, 3:00 pm), when we will be discussing and
> formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our
> constituency, how do we reach our constituency.
>
> Regards,
>
> Marcy
>
>
>
>>
>> LPSF,
>>
>> If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish America

had

> more
>> bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme
> Court Justice Ruth
>> Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris

and

> President
>> George W. Bush.
>>
>> Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and things
> that make
>> their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative, Religious-
> rightist stomachs
>> do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving
> peaceful people
>> and private property alone, they advocate and use the
> unconstitutional force
>> of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful people

and

> private
>> property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of
> supporters, all
>> agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the solution is
> always more
>> government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist mode
> of thinking and
>> destructive, unconstitutional form of government.
>>
>> To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated dislike

of

> the gay
>> lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That point
> being: To
>> take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no
> importance compared
>> to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government

regulation

6

Ron Getty has beautifully verbalized the problem: No one knows who
the heck we are. The solution: identify potential Libertarians and
go after them. There's the rub. Social liberals? Great, but not
surprisingly, they are also economic liberals. Fiscal conservatives?
Well, they are also social conservatives. Ron suggests finding a
niche. I suggest the small business person, and would love to hear
other ideas.

As a marketing professional Ron can please correct me if I am
mistaken: issues-based outreach is fine, but does not translate into
action at the ballot box. If "education" is our goal, great. But if
we are to become a real political party (one that gets more
than .000001% of votes), then we need warm bodies that will vote for
our candidates, not voters who say "Ah yes, they are right on that
particular issue."

See you all on Saturday.

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@y...>
wrote:

Dear Everyone;

Based on my own personal experience I have to ask the following.

Who in San Francisco knows there is such a thing as the Libertarian

Party? I found the Libertarian Party by total accident. If I had
known there was such a party and what it stood for I would have been
a registered Libertarian voter 15 years ago!

So personally I believe you need to ask what can be done to define

who a potential Libertarian may be and how do you let them know there
is a Libertarian Party and what it stands for? This way you can start
to define a constituency. Then once you have defined the constituency
then you can create activities to attract their attention to
introduce them, to the Libertarian Party.

Based on my background which involves various sorts of sales

marketing and advertising what you have is a niche market to go
after. How do you go after this niche market - where is it located -
what will attract it's attention? etc etc etc

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@h...> wrote:
And our constituency is?? Starchild, you know that I totally agree
with your principle of doing rather than talking. The proposed
discussion got on the agenda as a result of my noticing that EBL

has

an annual strategy/planning meeting, Rich Newell suggested the

topic

of constituency-based outreach (vs. issues-based outreach), and
Michael Edelstein thought a 15 minute discussion might be

worthwhile

(which I agree). So, if you come up with an activity, we will do

it

during the Activity slot in the agenda (how about writing down some
spots to film for our upcoming Public Access TV series, "A Walk

Down

the Streets of a Once Free City.") But I would like to see what
happens when we ask ourselves "Who is our constituency, if anybody?"

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Starchild <sfdreamer@e...>

wrote:

> Marcy,
>
> Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who

we

are as a
> group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our

constituency,"

I'd
> like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively by
> actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our
> constituency.
>
> What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts?
Most
> recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a

decriminalization

> initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up
with
> our own.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> <<< Starchild >>>
>
>
>
> > I would like to once again agree with Don on the matter of

unity

in
> > the LP against government intrusion in our private lives. And
since
> > we are on the general subject of what might be appropriate
> > response/action by LPSF, as a group, to the current political
> > landscape, I would also like to invite everybody to come the

the

next
> > LPSF monthly meeting on July 9 (Round Table Pizza on 16th Ave

and

> > Geary, room upstairs, 3:00 pm), when we will be discussing and
> > formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our
> > constituency, how do we reach our constituency.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Marcy
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> LPSF,
> >>
> >> If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish

America

had
> > more
> >> bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme
> > Court Justice Ruth
> >> Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris
and
> > President
> >> George W. Bush.
> >>
> >> Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and things
> > that make
> >> their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative, Religious-
> > rightist stomachs
> >> do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving
> > peaceful people
> >> and private property alone, they advocate and use the
> > unconstitutional force
> >> of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful

people

and
> > private
> >> property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of
> > supporters, all
> >> agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the solution

is

> > always more
> >> government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist

mode

> > of thinking and
> >> destructive, unconstitutional form of government.
> >>
> >> To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated

dislike

of
> > the gay
> >> lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That

point

> > being: To
> >> take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no
> > importance compared
> >> to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government
regulation
> > and
> >> involvement with issues of any type, including controversial
> > issues. Doug Newman's
> >> point to the Religious-Right is this: The only way to get
> > government out of
> >> your affairs is to also advocate getting government out of the
> > affairs of people
> >> outside your group, including the lives of peaceful people

that

> > make your
> >> stomach's do 360's.
> >>
> >> No group of people, including Libertarians, will ever be in
> > unanimous
> >> agreement on any issue, therefore, it is far more important and
> > unifying for
> >> Libertarians to stand united on principal against government
> > regulation and
> >> involvement in peaceful people's affairs. Because Doug Newman
> > promotes the idea of
> >> across-the-board, less government (therefore more freedom), I
> > welcome Doug
> >> Newman to the Libertarian Party.
> >>
> >> All the best,
> >>
> >> Don Fields
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

---------------------------------
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.

7

Dear Amarcy;

Yep we need the nice warm Libertarian bodies. And issues based outreach can attract the attention to draw them in. But the main difficulty with issues based outreach is broadly similar to proposing a solution to a problem without knowing what the real underlying problem is to that person.

A rough example: someone says to you I don't have enough money. You rush in to tell them how to have more money without exploring what " not having enough money" means to that person.

Issues based outreach may turn off the person because they might not care about that particular issue.

An example would be to endorse or support or do an intiative to decriminalize sex among consenting adults. It's a nice issue but how many people are effected by decriminalizing sex among consenting adults? What about state laws which would over ride City law?

Suppose the issue or voter initiative would be to require the Mayor and Supervisors to ride the Muni when on any business in San Francisco every day of the week no exceptions except national emergencies. Now you have something which would definitely attract a lot of attention.
It's The Muni!

Suppose the voter initiative was to limit the top pay for any City employee to $100,000 maximum including benefits and pension contributions and no overtime pay. This would certainly get a few people talking.

Broad based issues to attract attention where the intiative if passed would have a dramatic impact on the people involved and would result in positive feelings about Libertarians unless you were a highly paid City employee or were required to ride the Muni.

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:
Ron Getty has beautifully verbalized the problem: No one knows who
the heck we are. The solution: identify potential Libertarians and
go after them. There's the rub. Social liberals? Great, but not
surprisingly, they are also economic liberals. Fiscal conservatives?
Well, they are also social conservatives. Ron suggests finding a
niche. I suggest the small business person, and would love to hear
other ideas.

As a marketing professional Ron can please correct me if I am
mistaken: issues-based outreach is fine, but does not translate into
action at the ballot box. If "education" is our goal, great. But if
we are to become a real political party (one that gets more
than .000001% of votes), then we need warm bodies that will vote for
our candidates, not voters who say "Ah yes, they are right on that
particular issue."

See you all on Saturday.

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@y...>
wrote:

Dear Everyone;

Based on my own personal experience I have to ask the following.

Who in San Francisco knows there is such a thing as the Libertarian

Party? I found the Libertarian Party by total accident. If I had
known there was such a party and what it stood for I would have been
a registered Libertarian voter 15 years ago!

So personally I believe you need to ask what can be done to define

who a potential Libertarian may be and how do you let them know there
is a Libertarian Party and what it stands for? This way you can start
to define a constituency. Then once you have defined the constituency
then you can create activities to attract their attention to
introduce them, to the Libertarian Party.

Based on my background which involves various sorts of sales

marketing and advertising what you have is a niche market to go
after. How do you go after this niche market - where is it located -
what will attract it's attention? etc etc etc

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@h...> wrote:
And our constituency is?? Starchild, you know that I totally agree
with your principle of doing rather than talking. The proposed
discussion got on the agenda as a result of my noticing that EBL

has

an annual strategy/planning meeting, Rich Newell suggested the

topic

of constituency-based outreach (vs. issues-based outreach), and
Michael Edelstein thought a 15 minute discussion might be

worthwhile

(which I agree). So, if you come up with an activity, we will do

it

during the Activity slot in the agenda (how about writing down some
spots to film for our upcoming Public Access TV series, "A Walk

Down

the Streets of a Once Free City.") But I would like to see what
happens when we ask ourselves "Who is our constituency, if anybody?"

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Starchild <sfdreamer@e...>

wrote:

> Marcy,
>
> Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who

we

are as a
> group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our

constituency,"

I'd
> like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively by
> actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our
> constituency.
>
> What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts?
Most
> recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a

decriminalization

> initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up
with
> our own.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> <<< Starchild >>>
>
>
>
> > I would like to once again agree with Don on the matter of

unity

in
> > the LP against government intrusion in our private lives. And
since
> > we are on the general subject of what might be appropriate
> > response/action by LPSF, as a group, to the current political
> > landscape, I would also like to invite everybody to come the

the

next
> > LPSF monthly meeting on July 9 (Round Table Pizza on 16th Ave

and

> > Geary, room upstairs, 3:00 pm), when we will be discussing and
> > formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our
> > constituency, how do we reach our constituency.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Marcy
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> LPSF,
> >>
> >> If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish

America

had
> > more
> >> bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme
> > Court Justice Ruth
> >> Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris
and
> > President
> >> George W. Bush.
> >>
> >> Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and things
> > that make
> >> their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative, Religious-
> > rightist stomachs
> >> do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving
> > peaceful people
> >> and private property alone, they advocate and use the
> > unconstitutional force
> >> of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful

people

and
> > private
> >> property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of
> > supporters, all
> >> agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the solution

is

> > always more
> >> government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist

mode

> > of thinking and
> >> destructive, unconstitutional form of government.
> >>
> >> To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated

dislike

of
> > the gay
> >> lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That

point

> > being: To
> >> take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no
> > importance compared
> >> to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government
regulation
> > and
> >> involvement with issues of any type, including controversial
> > issues. Doug Newman's
> >> point to the Religious-Right is this: The only way to get
> > government out of
> >> your affairs is to also advocate getting government out of the
> > affairs of people
> >> outside your group, including the lives of peaceful people

that

> > make your
> >> stomach's do 360's.
> >>
> >> No group of people, including Libertarians, will ever be in
> > unanimous
> >> agreement on any issue, therefore, it is far more important and
> > unifying for
> >> Libertarians to stand united on principal against government
> > regulation and
> >> involvement in peaceful people's affairs. Because Doug Newman
> > promotes the idea of
> >> across-the-board, less government (therefore more freedom), I
> > welcome Doug
> >> Newman to the Libertarian Party.
> >>
> >> All the best,
> >>
> >> Don Fields
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

---------------------------------
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
Libertarian party California state worker compensation California state contractors license San francisco Politics

8

Who is our constituency? Human beings are our constituency! Sure, we could spend a lot of time talking about which subset of human beings is likely to be most sympathetic to libertarianism. That's been done, and the results are never conclusive, because human behavior isn't as cut and dried as scientific phenomena. If they had been, we would have heard about it. And while we were talking, we could have just done some kind of outreach to a random group of people that would have had a better chance of finding new libertarians than all our talking.

  I am not opposed to bringing critical thinking to bear on our endeavors. But let's make the thinking and analysis secondary to the endeavors themselves, not the other way around. The first "who" we have to deal with is not "who" to outreach to, but "who" is going to do the outreach, how will they do it, and how will we support them! We can sit around for hours talking about what kind of cake would taste best at our party and still be nearly as uncertain at the end of the day with nothing to show for it, so instead of doing a bunch of research and speculation on the merits of chocolate versus carrot versus vanilla, let's just take a vote on which flavor to make, put on our aprons and start cooking. We'll always have time to bake more cakes tomorrow if we plunge right in and do it without spending hours debating the proper oven settings!

  I ask again,

> What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts? Most
> recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a decriminalization
> initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up
> with our own.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

Dear Everyone;

Based on my own personal experience I have to ask the following.

Who in San Francisco knows there is such a thing as the Libertarian Party? I found the Libertarian Party by total accident. If I had known there was such a party and what it stood for I would have been a registered Libertarian voter 15 years ago!

So personally I believe you need to ask what can be done to define who a potential Libertarian may be and how do you let them know there is a Libertarian Party and what it stands for? This way you can start to define a constituency. Then once you have defined the constituency then you can create activities to attract their attention to introduce them, to the Libertarian Party.

Based on my background which involves various sorts of sales marketing and advertising what you have is a niche market to go after. How do you go after this niche market - where is it located - what will attract it's attention? etc etc etc

Ron Getty
SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:

And our constituency is?? Starchild, you know that I totally agree
with your principle of doing rather than talking. The proposed
discussion got on the agenda as a result of my noticing that EBL has
an annual strategy/planning meeting, Rich Newell suggested the topic
of constituency-based outreach (vs. issues-based outreach), and
Michael Edelstein thought a 15 minute discussion might be worthwhile
(which I agree). So, if you come up with an activity, we will do it
during the Activity slot in the agenda (how about writing down some
spots to film for our upcoming Public Access TV series, "A Walk Down
the Streets of a Once Free City.") But I would like to see what
happens when we ask ourselves "Who is our constituency, if anybody?"

Marcy

> Marcy,
>
> Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who we
are as a
> group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our constituency,"
I'd
> like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively by
> actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our
> constituency.
>
> What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts?
Most
> recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a decriminalization
> initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up
with
> our own.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> <<< Starchild >>>
>
> > I would like to once again agree with Don on the matter of unity
in
> > the LP against government intrusion in our private lives. And
since
> > we are on the general subject of what might be appropriate
> > response/action by LPSF, as a group, to the current political
> > landscape, I would also like to invite everybody to come the the
next
> > LPSF monthly meeting on July 9 (Round Table Pizza on 16th Ave and
> > Geary, room upstairs, 3:00 pm), when we will be discussing and
> > formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our
> > constituency, how do we reach our constituency.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Marcy
> >
> >>
> >> LPSF,
> >>
> >> If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish America
had
> > more
> >> bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme
> > Court Justice Ruth
> >> Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris
and
> > President
> >> George W. Bush.
> >>
> >> Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and things
> > that make
> >> their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative, Religious-
> > rightist stomachs
> >> do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving
> > peaceful people
> >> and private property alone, they advocate and use the
> > unconstitutional force
> >> of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful people
and
> > private
> >> property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of
> > supporters, all
> >> agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the solution is
> > always more
> >> government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist mode
> > of thinking and
> >> destructive, unconstitutional form of government.
> >>
> >> To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated dislike
of
> > the gay
> >> lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That point
> > being: To
> >> take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no
> > importance compared
> >> to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government
regulation
> > and
> >> involvement with issues of any type, including controversial
> > issues. Doug Newman's
> >> point to the Religious-Right is this: The only way to get
> > government out of
> >> your affairs is to also advocate getting government out of the
> > affairs of people
> >> outside your group, including the lives of peaceful people that
> > make your
> >> stomach's do 360's.
> >>
> >> No group of people, including Libertarians, will ever be in
> > unanimous
> >> agreement on any issue, therefore, it is far more important and
> > unifying for
> >> Libertarians to stand united on principal against government
> > regulation and
> >> involvement in peaceful people's affairs. Because Doug Newman
> > promotes the idea of
> >> across-the-board, less government (therefore more freedom), I
> > welcome Doug
> >> Newman to the Libertarian Party.
> >>
> >> All the best,
> >>
> >> Don Fields
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >

<image.tiff>

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.

<image.tiff>

9

I once again agree with you, Starchild. "Sitting around for hours"
talking about outreach is definitely not good; that is why the
subject only has 15 minutes on the Agenda. Voting on what flavor
(constituency) our cake (outreach) should have is good; that is what
I have in mind for Saturday. Emphasis on "who" is going to do
outreach rather than "who" the outreachee should be is good; and I
hope some of us will be energized into action.

Regarding your question about the status of propositions: Nothing
was decided (not enough interested "who" to act on the issues that
were presented).

Marcy

  Who is our constituency? Human beings are our constituency!

Sure, we

could spend a lot of time talking about which subset of human

beings is

likely to be most sympathetic to libertarianism. That's been done,

and

the results are never conclusive, because human behavior isn't as

cut

and dried as scientific phenomena. If they had been, we would have
heard about it. And while we were talking, we could have just done

some

kind of outreach to a random group of people that would have had a
better chance of finding new libertarians than all our talking.

  I am not opposed to bringing critical thinking to bear on our
endeavors. But let's make the thinking and analysis secondary to

the

endeavors themselves, not the other way around. The first "who" we

have

to deal with is not "who" to outreach to, but "who" is going to do

the

outreach, how will they do it, and how will we support them! We can

sit

around for hours talking about what kind of cake would taste best

at

our party and still be nearly as uncertain at the end of the day

with

nothing to show for it, so instead of doing a bunch of research and
speculation on the merits of chocolate versus carrot versus

vanilla,

let's just take a vote on which flavor to make, put on our aprons

and

start cooking. We'll always have time to bake more cakes tomorrow

if we

plunge right in and do it without spending hours debating the

proper

oven settings!

  I ask again,

> > What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts?

Most

> > recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a

decriminalization

> > initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up
> > with our own.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

> Dear Everyone;
>
> Based on my own personal experience I have to ask the following.
>
> Who in San Francisco knows there is such a thing as the

Libertarian

> Party? I found the Libertarian Party by total accident. If I had

known

> there was such a party and what it stood for I would have been a
> registered Libertarian voter 15 years ago!
>
> So personally I believe you need to ask what can be done to

define who

> a potential Libertarian may be and how do you let them know there

is a

> Libertarian Party and what it stands for? This way you can start

to

> define a constituency. Then once you have defined the

constituency

> then you can create activities to attract their attention to

introduce

> them, to the Libertarian Party.
>
> Based on my background which involves various sorts of sales

marketing

> and advertising what you have is a niche market to go after. How

do

> you go after this niche market - where is it located - what will
> attract it's attention? etc etc etc
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
>
> "Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@h...> wrote:
>
> And our constituency is?? Starchild, you know that I totally

agree

> with your principle of doing rather than talking. The proposed
> discussion got on the agenda as a result of my noticing that EBL

has

> an annual strategy/planning meeting, Rich Newell suggested the

topic

> of constituency-based outreach (vs. issues-based outreach), and
> Michael Edelstein thought a 15 minute discussion might be

worthwhile

> (which I agree). So, if you come up with an activity, we will do

it

> during the Activity slot in the agenda (how about writing down

some

> spots to film for our upcoming Public Access TV series, "A Walk

Down

> the Streets of a Once Free City.") But I would like to see what
> happens when we ask ourselves "Who is our constituency, if

anybody?"

>
> Marcy
>
> --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Starchild <sfdreamer@e...>

wrote:

> > Marcy,
> >
> > Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who

we

> are as a
> > group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our

constituency,"

> I'd
> > like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively

by

> > actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our
> > constituency.
> >
> > What has been happening with our ballot initiative

efforts?

> Most
> > recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a

decriminalization

> > initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come up
> with
> > our own.
> >
> > Yours in liberty,
> > <<< Starchild >>>
> >
> >
> >
> > > I would like to once again agree with Don on the matter of

unity

> in
> > > the LP against government intrusion in our private lives. And
> since
> > > we are on the general subject of what might be appropriate
> > > response/action by LPSF, as a group, to the current political
> > > landscape, I would also like to invite everybody to come the

the

> next
> > > LPSF monthly meeting on July 9 (Round Table Pizza on 16th Ave

and

> > > Geary, room upstairs, 3:00 pm), when we will be discussing and
> > > formulating guidelines on who we are as a group, what is our
> > > constituency, how do we reach our constituency.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Marcy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> LPSF,
> > >>
> > >> If Doug Newman is a bigot as some people claim, I wish

America

> had
> > > more
> > >> bigots like Doug Newman and less prohibitionists like Supreme
> > > Court Justice Ruth
> > >> Bader-Ginsburg, San Francisco District Attorney Kamala

Harris

> and
> > > President
> > >> George W. Bush.
> > >>
> > >> Ginsburg, Harris and Bush have long lists of people and

things

> > > that make
> > >> their "unbigoted" Progressive and Neo-conservative,

Religious-

> > > rightist stomachs
> > >> do 360's. Instead of minding their own business and leaving
> > > peaceful people
> > >> and private property alone, they advocate and use the
> > > unconstitutional force
> > >> of government to kill, destroy and incarcerate peaceful

people

> and
> > > private
> > >> property they do not like. They, and their diverse group of
> > > supporters, all
> > >> agree: No matter the problem (real or imagined), the

solution is

> > > always more
> > >> government. Doug Newman is a critic of that common, Statist

mode

> > > of thinking and
> > >> destructive, unconstitutional form of government.
> > >>
> > >> To agree or disagree with Doug Newman's strongly stated

dislike

> of
> > > the gay
> > >> lifestyle is to be petty and miss, or deny, his point. That

point

> > > being: To
> > >> take a stance on a controversial issue is of little or no
> > > importance compared
> > >> to, as a matter of principal, disapproval of government
> regulation
> > > and
> > >> involvement with issues of any type, including controversial
> > > issues. Doug Newman's
> > >> point to the Religious-Right is this: The only way to get
> > > government out of
> > >> your affairs is to also advocate getting government out of

the

> > > affairs of people
> > >> outside your group, including the lives of peaceful people

that

> > > make your
> > >> stomach's do 360's.
> > >>
> > >> No group of people, including Libertarians, will ever be in
> > > unanimous
> > >> agreement on any issue, therefore, it is far more important

and

> > > unifying for
> > >> Libertarians to stand united on principal against government
> > > regulation and
> > >> involvement in peaceful people's affairs. Because Doug Newman
> > > promotes the idea of
> > >> across-the-board, less government (therefore more freedom),

I

> > > welcome Doug
> > >> Newman to the Libertarian Party.
> > >>
> > >> All the best,
> > >>
> > >> Don Fields
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
<image.tiff>
>
> 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.

10

Marcy,

  "Sit around for hours" was an allusion to the cumulative amount of time spent on such things over consecutive meetings and gatherings, not what I thought was being proposed for tomorrow. If we have a vote tomorrow that leads to action, I will consider that good.

  Speaking of action, was any activism done at the last two meetings? And did anyone volunteer to choose an activism activity for this month at our last meeting?

  If not, I would like to propose that we sit around a map of San Francisco and start the process of identifying possible sites to include on a walking tour, by sticking in numbered pins to correspond with a list of sites and descriptions. I can bring a map, pins, and stickers for this purpose. I would ask others to bring their suggestions for sites, with as much specific information as possible, especially the precise location in question. If someone has a laptop computer they can bring, this would be helpful for the process of creating a list which can be emailed and printed out later, saving the trouble of writing everything down by hand.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

11

Starchild,

Your suggested activity for tomorrow is now on the agenda! Thank
you. Just for clarification, is the walking tour to which you refer
still the tour we discussed a few meetings back: Historic locations
that illustrate how San Francisco was an entreprenurial city free
from government intrusion? If that is what you have in mind, perhaps
a book or some website addresses describing old San Francisco might
get us started?

Marcy

Marcy,

  "Sit around for hours" was an allusion to the cumulative

amount of

time spent on such things over consecutive meetings and gatherings,

not

what I thought was being proposed for tomorrow. If we have a vote
tomorrow that leads to action, I will consider that good.

  Speaking of action, was any activism done at the last two

meetings?

And did anyone volunteer to choose an activism activity for this

month

at our last meeting?

  If not, I would like to propose that we sit around a map of

San

Francisco and start the process of identifying possible sites to
include on a walking tour, by sticking in numbered pins to

correspond

with a list of sites and descriptions. I can bring a map, pins, and
stickers for this purpose. I would ask others to bring their
suggestions for sites, with as much specific information as

possible,

especially the precise location in question. If someone has a

laptop

computer they can bring, this would be helpful for the process of
creating a list which can be emailed and printed out later, saving

the

trouble of writing everything down by hand.

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>

> I once again agree with you, Starchild. "Sitting around for

hours"

> talking about outreach is definitely not good; that is why the
> subject only has 15 minutes on the Agenda. Voting on what flavor
> (constituency) our cake (outreach) should have is good; that is

what

> I have in mind for Saturday. Emphasis on "who" is going to do
> outreach rather than "who" the outreachee should be is good; and I
> hope some of us will be energized into action.
>
> Regarding your question about the status of propositions: Nothing
> was decided (not enough interested "who" to act on the issues that
> were presented).
>
> Marcy
>
>
> --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Starchild <sfdreamer@e...>

wrote:

>> Who is our constituency? Human beings are our constituency!
> Sure, we
>> could spend a lot of time talking about which subset of human
> beings is
>> likely to be most sympathetic to libertarianism. That's been

done,

> and
>> the results are never conclusive, because human behavior isn't as
> cut
>> and dried as scientific phenomena. If they had been, we would

have

>> heard about it. And while we were talking, we could have just

done

> some
>> kind of outreach to a random group of people that would have had

a

>> better chance of finding new libertarians than all our talking.
>>
>> I am not opposed to bringing critical thinking to bear on our
>> endeavors. But let's make the thinking and analysis secondary to
> the
>> endeavors themselves, not the other way around. The first "who"

we

> have
>> to deal with is not "who" to outreach to, but "who" is going to

do

> the
>> outreach, how will they do it, and how will we support them! We

can

> sit
>> around for hours talking about what kind of cake would taste best
> at
>> our party and still be nearly as uncertain at the end of the day
> with
>> nothing to show for it, so instead of doing a bunch of research

and

>> speculation on the merits of chocolate versus carrot versus
> vanilla,
>> let's just take a vote on which flavor to make, put on our aprons
> and
>> start cooking. We'll always have time to bake more cakes tomorrow
> if we
>> plunge right in and do it without spending hours debating the
> proper
>> oven settings!
>>
>> I ask again,
>>
>>>> What has been happening with our ballot initiative efforts?
> Most
>>>> recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a
> decriminalization
>>>> initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come

up

>>>> with our own.
>>
>> Yours in liberty,
>> <<< Starchild >>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> Dear Everyone;
>>>
>>> Based on my own personal experience I have to ask the

following.

>>>
>>> Who in San Francisco knows there is such a thing as the
> Libertarian
>>> Party? I found the Libertarian Party by total accident. If I had
> known
>>> there was such a party and what it stood for I would have been a
>>> registered Libertarian voter 15 years ago!
>>>
>>> So personally I believe you need to ask what can be done to
> define who
>>> a potential Libertarian may be and how do you let them know

there

> is a
>>> Libertarian Party and what it stands for? This way you can start
> to
>>> define a constituency. Then once you have defined the
> constituency
>>> then you can create activities to attract their attention to
> introduce
>>> them, to the Libertarian Party.
>>>
>>> Based on my background which involves various sorts of sales
> marketing
>>> and advertising what you have is a niche market to go after. How
> do
>>> you go after this niche market - where is it located - what will
>>> attract it's attention? etc etc etc
>>>
>>> Ron Getty
>>> SF Libertarian
>>>
>>>
>>> "Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@h...> wrote:
>>>
>>> And our constituency is?? Starchild, you know that I totally
> agree
>>> with your principle of doing rather than talking. The proposed
>>> discussion got on the agenda as a result of my noticing that EBL
> has
>>> an annual strategy/planning meeting, Rich Newell suggested the
> topic
>>> of constituency-based outreach (vs. issues-based outreach), and
>>> Michael Edelstein thought a 15 minute discussion might be
> worthwhile
>>> (which I agree). So, if you come up with an activity, we will

do

> it
>>> during the Activity slot in the agenda (how about writing down
> some
>>> spots to film for our upcoming Public Access TV series, "A Walk
> Down
>>> the Streets of a Once Free City.") But I would like to see what
>>> happens when we ask ourselves "Who is our constituency, if
> anybody?"
>>>
>>> Marcy
>>>
>>> --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Starchild <sfdreamer@e...>
> wrote:
>>>> Marcy,
>>>>
>>>> Rather than "discussing and formulating guidelines on who
> we
>>> are as a
>>>> group, what is our constituency, how do we reach our
> constituency,"
>>> I'd
>>>> like to suggest that we could spend our time more productively
> by
>>>> actually doing something, such as actually trying to reach our
>>>> constituency.
>>>>
>>>> What has been happening with our ballot initiative
> efforts?
>>> Most
>>>> recently I recall seeing a proposal to support a
> decriminalization
>>>> initiative by the Sex Workers Outreach Project in SF, or come

up

12

Starchild,

Your suggested activity for tomorrow is now on the agenda! Thank
you. Just for clarification, is the walking tour to which you refer
still the tour we discussed a few meetings back: Historic locations
that illustrate how San Francisco was an entreprenurial city free
from government intrusion? If that is what you have in mind, perhaps
a book or some website addresses describing old San Francisco might
get us started?

Marcy

Marcy,

  Yes, that is part of what I had in mind for a tour, though not all of it. I think we could also talk about historical abuses of government power, current or recent politics and life in San Francisco, tell stories about people or incidents that illustrate libertarian values, and just show our tourists plain old interesting stuff.
  
  I'm hoping that everyone will have at least one or two good ideas about things to feature on a tour. Certainly there are lots of websites out there (one I just found is http://sanfrancisco.about.com/cs/tours/a/barbarycoast.htm), and the library has lots of books on SF history. Another research possibility would be to plug various street addresses into the archives of the SF Chronicle and see what comes up.

  However I think the most valuable thing we can do in preparation for designing our own walking tours is to go on other peoples' walking tours of SF, be observant, and take notes. I posted a message about this a couple months ago before I went to Europe, including info about the library's cornucopia of free tours, and Justin sent a message informing us about the Henry George School walking tours, both of which I've recopied below. Anyone who wants to meet up and go on a tour, let me know!

Yours in liberty,
        <<< Starchild >>>