P.S. - Re: Abuse of LNCC.org website


  Thank you for your response. You say the LNCC's primary purpose is training and electing candidates. But the same faction running the LNCC -- which you yourself side with most of the time -- typically says that electing candidates should be the *Libertarian Party's* main purpose as well. So I fail to see how that "primary purpose" of the LNCC is going to distinguish it from the LNC in the minds of folks like Root and Starr.

  I also note that another LNC member just told me the "sole" purpose of the LNCC was something entirely different (raising money)! I think I'd like to get it from the horse's mouth by reading the document authorizing the LNCC and setting forth its purpose and operations. Would you or someone else on the committee please send me that document?

  Furthermore, if the LNCC's website is designed to *recruit candidates*, it should be aimed at people who are *already* libertarians, not at the general public! Before pushing somebody to run for office, shouldn't we *first* introduce him or her to the ideas and to the party, and find out whether or not they're really with us? Oh, but I guess that would be contrary to Wayne's philosophy that the only thing which matters is winning!

  Neither Mark Hinkle nor any past LP chairs that I'm aware of have had such extensive, blatantly self-promoting material on our party's websites. Somehow, the Libertarian Party has managed in the past to convince people that getting involved with us wouldn't be a waste of their time or money, without pushing glowing essays touting our chair's credentials and accomplishments at them. And avoiding that sort of thing is a *very good idea*, imho. As the saying goes, when they start putting pictures of *living* politicians on the money, it's time to run for the hills!

Love & Liberty,
                                      ((( starchild )))

You are DEFINITELY my kid of person! Letitia Pepper

Thanks, Letitia! :slight_smile: I may not be on Steve Kubby's case about the Regulate Marijuana Like Wine Act (you have yet to convince me on that one), but I definitely tend to speak out within the party or other forums when I see something that doesn't seem right.

Love & Liberty,
                                   ((( starchild )))

You don't need to be on Steve Kubby's case -- I can take care of him myself.
I re-read my analysis and I think I skipped a step, but I KNOW what they are doing -- and why. I just checked out an MCLE (mandatory continuing education of the Bar) program with 5.75 hours' worth of stuff on "wine law." Let me tell you, there is a LOT of regulation of wineries!
Why would you choose to vote to tax, control and regulate cannabis, when you can just decriminalize it? Don't Libertarians want more freedom and less government control?
I'm working on fliers that say :"Don't "legalize" cannabis -- LIBERATE it!