SF Examiner Publishes My Ant-War On Terror LTE With Libertarian Affiliation

Ron,

Magnificent!

Best, Michael

Dear Dr. Mike;
   
  Yes I am thank you!
   
  BTW does that self-aggrandizement make me a candidate for some clinical sociopathic psychology??? Or is it just psychosis of the cerebellum?
   
  Second BTW: Has anyone done a mental mapping of the kind of people who become Libertarians and what kinds of waco loco dreamer oners become Libertarians?
   
  Third BTW: What is it with women and Libertarianism? It seems the Repubs and Demos have a lot more women attending almost but not quite equally in numbers to men. But Libertariansim and women???
   
  Marcy maybe you could offer some insight???
  
Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian
   
  dredelstein@... wrote:
          Ron,
   
  Magnificent!
  
Best, Michael

Dear Ron,

Sorry for my delay in responding to your request that I "provide some
insight" into the scarcity of women Libertarians; I was too busy
empathizing :wink:

OK, here goes:

1. First, go back to square one regarding the gender difference of
synthesizers vs empathizers. That does not holp up. There are
enough matriarchal societies (women are the system builders) to
support my assertion. So are the hundreds of women small business
owners (system builders), including myself. Also, given the sorry
state of the LP, it does not look to me that a lot of system building
has been going on here. So, the fact that there are no women
Libertarians because their emphathizing characteristics make them
better suited to be Dems or Greens does not ring true for me.

2. So, then why? It might just be a selective mechanism going on.
Perhaps the founding group preferred the confort that comes with
sticking with people who are most like you, and since the LP is
relatively new, that self selection is still strong, perhaps
unconsciously intimidating women that might want to join.

3. Assuming a change to a more diverse population is desired, which
I think it is, how do we achieve this? One way might be for the men
in the group to make a concerted effort to bring women in their lives
to meetings, socials, tabling, etc. I remember Mr. Rogers from PBS's
Mr. Roger's Neighborhood used to emphasize that little boys and girls
need to see people that look like them in gender, color, physical
attributes, etc. I think that goes for everybody.

I would be interested in hearing from others on this, since I
personally feel that the gender lopsidedness of the LP is not
conducive to its strengh.

Marcy

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

Dear Dr. Mike;
   
  Yes I am thank you!
   
  BTW does that self-aggrandizement make me a candidate for some

clinical sociopathic psychology??? Or is it just psychosis of the
cerebellum?

   
  Second BTW: Has anyone done a mental mapping of the kind of

people who become Libertarians and what kinds of waco loco dreamer
oners become Libertarians?

   
  Third BTW: What is it with women and Libertarianism? It seems the

Repubs and Demos have a lot more women attending almost but not quite
equally in numbers to men. But Libertariansim and women???

   
  Marcy maybe you could offer some insight???
  
Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian
   
  dredelstein@... wrote:
          Ron,
   
  Magnificent!
  
Best, Michael
   
  To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner

Publishes My Ant-War On Terror LTE With Libertarian Affiliation

  Dear Starchild;
   
  Actually by defending our borders what I meant was building a 50"

tall wall around Washington DC.

   
  Locking inside all members of the Executive and Congress and all

the people working at all the agencies.

   
  Disconnect their telephones and internet.
   
  Then use the military to patrol 24/7 around the wall.
   
  From time to time toss food scraps over the wall to keep them

slightly ravenous.

   
  Build a scaffold near the top so people could come and look down

at the Morons of Mordor.

   
  Then force them to build bonfires of all the idiot regulations

Washington has issued since Washington became Washington.

   
  Now that would be a border worth defending.
   
  Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian
  
Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote:
  Ron,

I'll second Michael on both the congratulations and the comment

about

"defend America's borders." In the context of the controversy over
migration, talk about "defending the borders" could easily come

across

as anti-immigrant, although I'm sure you just meant have U.S.
government troops defend the U.S. rather than be deployed in other
countries.

Also, please do not post to both the lpsf-discuss and lpsf-

activists

lists unless it's something *really* important; many people

subscribe

to both and will get such emails twice. The lpsf-discuss is

probably

the more appropriate list, as lpsf-activists is for core party

business.

Yours in liberty,
<<< starchild >>>

> Ron,
>
> Congratulations on your publication of another great LTE!
>
> Questions: You say: "defend America's borders." I haven't heard
> of anyone attacking the U.S. Govt's borders, have you? Is there

a "war

> on borders?"
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Ron Getty
> To: LPSF-ACTIVISTS ; Libertarian Yahoo Group ; CAL-LIBS
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 7:30 AM
> Subject: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner Publishes My Ant-War On

Terror

> LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
>
> Dear Everyone;
>
> Yesterday Jay Ambrose a SF Examiner columnist had an article on

the

> War on Terror. I used the article to point out some important
> facts about the war on terror and why we had the fight and what

to do

> to stop it.
>
> The Ambrose column:
>
> http://www.examiner.com/a-
> 102579~U_S__must_stiffen_resolve_to_win_war_on_terror.html
>
> My LTE with Libertarian affiliation:
>
> http://www.examiner.com/a-103727~Letters__May_10th__2006.html
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
>
> Letters: May 10th, 2006
>
> War on terror
>
>
> Jay Ambrose claims World War III is the war on terror ("U.S. must
> stiffen resolve to win war on terror," May 9). Attacking a

worldwide,

> multicause, religious-based ideology with technology will not win

this

> war. The reason for this mess is U.S. imperialism, forced regime
> changes and propping up dictators who support our policies while
> receiving America's largesse.
>
> One hundred fifty thousand U.S. soldiers are at 150 foreign

bases,

> with another 160,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan. America does not

need to

> be a latter-day imperial Roman Empire.
>
> To win this war, bring home U.S. troops and defend America's

borders.

> Enact trade agreements instead of military agreements for a new

Pax

> Americana free from war.
>
> Ron Getty
> Libertarian Party San Francisco
> The City
>
>
> SPONSORED 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
        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;
   
  Thanks for the response. Although Dr. Mike as to wine Mike and UCSF Mike was responding as a clinical psychologist and trying to adapt the psychology of personality types to Libertarianism.
   
  I too feel there is a gender problem and what would it take for a program to not only attract women but also more members in all areas.
   
  Not wanting to label - but how many Asian members do we have? Black members? Hispanic and so on??? Why this dearth in such a cosmopolitan City as San Francisco.
   
  Way back in my old Republican party days we did have member diversity here in the City. If Republicans can do this why not Libertarians???
   
  What is it - if there is an it - which can be done to increase our membership across spectrums of sex race creed color religion etc etc etc etc???
   
  Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:
  Dear Ron,

Sorry for my delay in responding to your request that I "provide some
insight" into the scarcity of women Libertarians; I was too busy
empathizing :wink:

OK, here goes:

1. First, go back to square one regarding the gender difference of
synthesizers vs empathizers. That does not holp up. There are
enough matriarchal societies (women are the system builders) to
support my assertion. So are the hundreds of women small business
owners (system builders), including myself. Also, given the sorry
state of the LP, it does not look to me that a lot of system building
has been going on here. So, the fact that there are no women
Libertarians because their emphathizing characteristics make them
better suited to be Dems or Greens does not ring true for me.

2. So, then why? It might just be a selective mechanism going on.
Perhaps the founding group preferred the confort that comes with
sticking with people who are most like you, and since the LP is
relatively new, that self selection is still strong, perhaps
unconsciously intimidating women that might want to join.

3. Assuming a change to a more diverse population is desired, which
I think it is, how do we achieve this? One way might be for the men
in the group to make a concerted effort to bring women in their lives
to meetings, socials, tabling, etc. I remember Mr. Rogers from PBS's
Mr. Roger's Neighborhood used to emphasize that little boys and girls
need to see people that look like them in gender, color, physical
attributes, etc. I think that goes for everybody.

I would be interested in hearing from others on this, since I
personally feel that the gender lopsidedness of the LP is not
conducive to its strengh.

Marcy

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

Dear Dr. Mike;
   
  Yes I am thank you!
   
  BTW does that self-aggrandizement make me a candidate for some

clinical sociopathic psychology??? Or is it just psychosis of the
cerebellum?

   
  Second BTW: Has anyone done a mental mapping of the kind of

people who become Libertarians and what kinds of waco loco dreamer
oners become Libertarians?

   
  Third BTW: What is it with women and Libertarianism? It seems the

Repubs and Demos have a lot more women attending almost but not quite
equally in numbers to men. But Libertariansim and women???

   
  Marcy maybe you could offer some insight???
  
Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian
   
  dredelstein@... wrote:
          Ron,
   
  Magnificent!
  
Best, Michael
   
  To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
  Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner

Publishes My Ant-War On Terror LTE With Libertarian Affiliation

  Dear Starchild;
   
  Actually by defending our borders what I meant was building a 50"

tall wall around Washington DC.

   
  Locking inside all members of the Executive and Congress and all

the people working at all the agencies.

   
  Disconnect their telephones and internet.
   
  Then use the military to patrol 24/7 around the wall.
   
  From time to time toss food scraps over the wall to keep them

slightly ravenous.

   
  Build a scaffold near the top so people could come and look down

at the Morons of Mordor.

   
  Then force them to build bonfires of all the idiot regulations

Washington has issued since Washington became Washington.

   
  Now that would be a border worth defending.
   
  Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian
  
Starchild <sfdreamer@...> wrote:
  Ron,

I'll second Michael on both the congratulations and the comment

about

"defend America's borders." In the context of the controversy over
migration, talk about "defending the borders" could easily come

across

as anti-immigrant, although I'm sure you just meant have U.S.
government troops defend the U.S. rather than be deployed in other
countries.

Also, please do not post to both the lpsf-discuss and lpsf-

activists

lists unless it's something *really* important; many people

subscribe

to both and will get such emails twice. The lpsf-discuss is

probably

the more appropriate list, as lpsf-activists is for core party

business.

Yours in liberty,
<<< starchild >>>

> Ron,
>
> Congratulations on your publication of another great LTE!
>
> Questions: You say: "defend America's borders." I haven't heard
> of anyone attacking the U.S. Govt's borders, have you? Is there

a "war

> on borders?"
>
> Best, Michael
>
> From: Ron Getty
> To: LPSF-ACTIVISTS ; Libertarian Yahoo Group ; CAL-LIBS
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 7:30 AM
> Subject: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner Publishes My Ant-War On

Terror

> LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
>
> Dear Everyone;
>
> Yesterday Jay Ambrose a SF Examiner columnist had an article on

the

> War on Terror. I used the article to point out some important
> facts about the war on terror and why we had the fight and what

to do

> to stop it.
>
> The Ambrose column:
>
> http://www.examiner.com/a-
> 102579~U_S__must_stiffen_resolve_to_win_war_on_terror.html
>
> My LTE with Libertarian affiliation:
>
> http://www.examiner.com/a-103727~Letters__May_10th__2006.html
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
>
> Letters: May 10th, 2006
>
> War on terror
>
>
> Jay Ambrose claims World War III is the war on terror ("U.S. must
> stiffen resolve to win war on terror," May 9). Attacking a

worldwide,

> multicause, religious-based ideology with technology will not win

this

> war. The reason for this mess is U.S. imperialism, forced regime
> changes and propping up dictators who support our policies while
> receiving America's largesse.
>
> One hundred fifty thousand U.S. soldiers are at 150 foreign

bases,

> with another 160,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan. America does not

need to

> be a latter-day imperial Roman Empire.
>
> To win this war, bring home U.S. troops and defend America's

borders.

> Enact trade agreements instead of military agreements for a new

Pax

> Americana free from war.
>
> Ron Getty
> Libertarian Party San Francisco
> The City
>
>
> SPONSORED 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
        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 Ron,

I gave you my answers to your questions. Although I was addressing
primarily gender, I believe the same would hold true for color or
culture. Your comment regarding the Replublican Party does not negate
my interpretation, since the RP is a lot older than the LP.

It takes time to achieve diversity in any group, I think. For the LP
to become diverse so soon would take a lot of effort.

Let's see how we do tomorrow if the kids from Galileo High School
show up at our meeting as planned. How welcoming of "strangers" will
we be? How willing to listen to their concerns? How attractive
to "outsiders" will our general demeanor be?

Marcy

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

Dear Marcy;
   
  Thanks for the response. Although Dr. Mike as to wine Mike and

UCSF Mike was responding as a clinical psychologist and trying to
adapt the psychology of personality types to Libertarianism.

   
  I too feel there is a gender problem and what would it take for a

program to not only attract women but also more members in all areas.

   
  Not wanting to label - but how many Asian members do we have?

Black members? Hispanic and so on??? Why this dearth in such a
cosmopolitan City as San Francisco.

   
  Way back in my old Republican party days we did have member

diversity here in the City. If Republicans can do this why not
Libertarians???

   
  What is it - if there is an it - which can be done to increase

our membership across spectrums of sex race creed color religion etc
etc etc etc???

   
  Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:
  Dear Ron,

Sorry for my delay in responding to your request that I "provide

some

insight" into the scarcity of women Libertarians; I was too busy
empathizing :wink:

OK, here goes:

1. First, go back to square one regarding the gender difference of
synthesizers vs empathizers. That does not holp up. There are
enough matriarchal societies (women are the system builders) to
support my assertion. So are the hundreds of women small business
owners (system builders), including myself. Also, given the sorry
state of the LP, it does not look to me that a lot of system

building

has been going on here. So, the fact that there are no women
Libertarians because their emphathizing characteristics make them
better suited to be Dems or Greens does not ring true for me.

2. So, then why? It might just be a selective mechanism going on.
Perhaps the founding group preferred the confort that comes with
sticking with people who are most like you, and since the LP is
relatively new, that self selection is still strong, perhaps
unconsciously intimidating women that might want to join.

3. Assuming a change to a more diverse population is desired,

which

I think it is, how do we achieve this? One way might be for the

men

in the group to make a concerted effort to bring women in their

lives

to meetings, socials, tabling, etc. I remember Mr. Rogers from

PBS's

Mr. Roger's Neighborhood used to emphasize that little boys and

girls

need to see people that look like them in gender, color, physical
attributes, etc. I think that goes for everybody.

I would be interested in hearing from others on this, since I
personally feel that the gender lopsidedness of the LP is not
conducive to its strengh.

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@>
wrote:
>
> Dear Dr. Mike;
>
> Yes I am thank you!
>
> BTW does that self-aggrandizement make me a candidate for some
clinical sociopathic psychology??? Or is it just psychosis of the
cerebellum?
>
> Second BTW: Has anyone done a mental mapping of the kind of
people who become Libertarians and what kinds of waco loco dreamer
oners become Libertarians?
>
> Third BTW: What is it with women and Libertarianism? It seems

the

Repubs and Demos have a lot more women attending almost but not

quite

equally in numbers to men. But Libertariansim and women???
>
> Marcy maybe you could offer some insight???
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> dredelstein@ wrote:
> Ron,
>
> Magnificent!
>
> Best, Michael
>
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner
Publishes My Ant-War On Terror LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
>
>
>
> Dear Starchild;
>
> Actually by defending our borders what I meant was building a

50"

tall wall around Washington DC.
>
> Locking inside all members of the Executive and Congress and

all

the people working at all the agencies.
>
> Disconnect their telephones and internet.
>
> Then use the military to patrol 24/7 around the wall.
>
> From time to time toss food scraps over the wall to keep them
slightly ravenous.
>
> Build a scaffold near the top so people could come and look

down

at the Morons of Mordor.
>
> Then force them to build bonfires of all the idiot regulations
Washington has issued since Washington became Washington.
>
> Now that would be a border worth defending.
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> Starchild <sfdreamer@> wrote:
> Ron,
>
> I'll second Michael on both the congratulations and the comment
about
> "defend America's borders." In the context of the controversy

over

> migration, talk about "defending the borders" could easily come
across
> as anti-immigrant, although I'm sure you just meant have U.S.
> government troops defend the U.S. rather than be deployed in

other

> countries.
>
> Also, please do not post to both the lpsf-discuss and lpsf-
activists
> lists unless it's something *really* important; many people
subscribe
> to both and will get such emails twice. The lpsf-discuss is
probably
> the more appropriate list, as lpsf-activists is for core party
business.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> <<< starchild >>>
>
>
>
> > Ron,
> >
> > Congratulations on your publication of another great LTE!
> >
> > Questions: You say: "defend America's borders." I haven't heard
> > of anyone attacking the U.S. Govt's borders, have you? Is there
a "war
> > on borders?"
> >
> > Best, Michael
> >
> > From: Ron Getty
> > To: LPSF-ACTIVISTS ; Libertarian Yahoo Group ; CAL-LIBS
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 7:30 AM
> > Subject: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner Publishes My Ant-War On
Terror
> > LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
> >
> > Dear Everyone;
> >
> > Yesterday Jay Ambrose a SF Examiner columnist had an article on
the
> > War on Terror. I used the article to point out some important
> > facts about the war on terror and why we had the fight and what
to do
> > to stop it.
> >
> > The Ambrose column:
> >
> > http://www.examiner.com/a-
> > 102579~U_S__must_stiffen_resolve_to_win_war_on_terror.html
> >
> > My LTE with Libertarian affiliation:
> >
> > http://www.examiner.com/a-103727~Letters__May_10th__2006.html
> >
> > Ron Getty
> > SF Libertarian
> >
> >
> > Letters: May 10th, 2006
> >
> > War on terror
> >
> >
> > Jay Ambrose claims World War III is the war on terror ("U.S.

must

> > stiffen resolve to win war on terror," May 9). Attacking a
worldwide,
> > multicause, religious-based ideology with technology will not

win

this
> > war. The reason for this mess is U.S. imperialism, forced

regime

> > changes and propping up dictators who support our policies

while

> > receiving America's largesse.
> >
> > One hundred fifty thousand U.S. soldiers are at 150 foreign
bases,
> > with another 160,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan. America does not
need to
> > be a latter-day imperial Roman Empire.
> >
> > To win this war, bring home U.S. troops and defend America's
borders.
> > Enact trade agreements instead of military agreements for a new
Pax
> > Americana free from war.
> >
> > Ron Getty
> > Libertarian Party San Francisco
> > The City
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED 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
> 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.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>

---------------------------------
  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;
   
  Only time will tell on that one and the reaction to us and who were are and how we are.
   
  I'm guessing tomorrow would not be a good time for us to do the planned re-enactment of the Druid Summer Solstice Blood Sacrifices as we had planned so there will be a fruitful harvest in the Fall. Hunh?
   
  Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:
  Dear Ron,

I gave you my answers to your questions. Although I was addressing
primarily gender, I believe the same would hold true for color or
culture. Your comment regarding the Replublican Party does not negate
my interpretation, since the RP is a lot older than the LP.

It takes time to achieve diversity in any group, I think. For the LP
to become diverse so soon would take a lot of effort.

Let's see how we do tomorrow if the kids from Galileo High School
show up at our meeting as planned. How welcoming of "strangers" will
we be? How willing to listen to their concerns? How attractive
to "outsiders" will our general demeanor be?

Marcy

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

Dear Marcy;
   
  Thanks for the response. Although Dr. Mike as to wine Mike and

UCSF Mike was responding as a clinical psychologist and trying to
adapt the psychology of personality types to Libertarianism.

   
  I too feel there is a gender problem and what would it take for a

program to not only attract women but also more members in all areas.

   
  Not wanting to label - but how many Asian members do we have?

Black members? Hispanic and so on??? Why this dearth in such a
cosmopolitan City as San Francisco.

   
  Way back in my old Republican party days we did have member

diversity here in the City. If Republicans can do this why not
Libertarians???

   
  What is it - if there is an it - which can be done to increase

our membership across spectrums of sex race creed color religion etc
etc etc etc???

   
  Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:
  Dear Ron,

Sorry for my delay in responding to your request that I "provide

some

insight" into the scarcity of women Libertarians; I was too busy
empathizing :wink:

OK, here goes:

1. First, go back to square one regarding the gender difference of
synthesizers vs empathizers. That does not holp up. There are
enough matriarchal societies (women are the system builders) to
support my assertion. So are the hundreds of women small business
owners (system builders), including myself. Also, given the sorry
state of the LP, it does not look to me that a lot of system

building

has been going on here. So, the fact that there are no women
Libertarians because their emphathizing characteristics make them
better suited to be Dems or Greens does not ring true for me.

2. So, then why? It might just be a selective mechanism going on.
Perhaps the founding group preferred the confort that comes with
sticking with people who are most like you, and since the LP is
relatively new, that self selection is still strong, perhaps
unconsciously intimidating women that might want to join.

3. Assuming a change to a more diverse population is desired,

which

I think it is, how do we achieve this? One way might be for the

men

in the group to make a concerted effort to bring women in their

lives

to meetings, socials, tabling, etc. I remember Mr. Rogers from

PBS's

Mr. Roger's Neighborhood used to emphasize that little boys and

girls

need to see people that look like them in gender, color, physical
attributes, etc. I think that goes for everybody.

I would be interested in hearing from others on this, since I
personally feel that the gender lopsidedness of the LP is not
conducive to its strengh.

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@>
wrote:
>
> Dear Dr. Mike;
>
> Yes I am thank you!
>
> BTW does that self-aggrandizement make me a candidate for some
clinical sociopathic psychology??? Or is it just psychosis of the
cerebellum?
>
> Second BTW: Has anyone done a mental mapping of the kind of
people who become Libertarians and what kinds of waco loco dreamer
oners become Libertarians?
>
> Third BTW: What is it with women and Libertarianism? It seems

the

Repubs and Demos have a lot more women attending almost but not

quite

equally in numbers to men. But Libertariansim and women???
>
> Marcy maybe you could offer some insight???
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> dredelstein@ wrote:
> Ron,
>
> Magnificent!
>
> Best, Michael
>
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:25 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner
Publishes My Ant-War On Terror LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
>
>
>
> Dear Starchild;
>
> Actually by defending our borders what I meant was building a

50"

tall wall around Washington DC.
>
> Locking inside all members of the Executive and Congress and

all

the people working at all the agencies.
>
> Disconnect their telephones and internet.
>
> Then use the military to patrol 24/7 around the wall.
>
> From time to time toss food scraps over the wall to keep them
slightly ravenous.
>
> Build a scaffold near the top so people could come and look

down

at the Morons of Mordor.
>
> Then force them to build bonfires of all the idiot regulations
Washington has issued since Washington became Washington.
>
> Now that would be a border worth defending.
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> Starchild <sfdreamer@> wrote:
> Ron,
>
> I'll second Michael on both the congratulations and the comment
about
> "defend America's borders." In the context of the controversy

over

> migration, talk about "defending the borders" could easily come
across
> as anti-immigrant, although I'm sure you just meant have U.S.
> government troops defend the U.S. rather than be deployed in

other

> countries.
>
> Also, please do not post to both the lpsf-discuss and lpsf-
activists
> lists unless it's something *really* important; many people
subscribe
> to both and will get such emails twice. The lpsf-discuss is
probably
> the more appropriate list, as lpsf-activists is for core party
business.
>
> Yours in liberty,
> <<< starchild >>>
>
>
>
> > Ron,
> >
> > Congratulations on your publication of another great LTE!
> >
> > Questions: You say: "defend America's borders." I haven't heard
> > of anyone attacking the U.S. Govt's borders, have you? Is there
a "war
> > on borders?"
> >
> > Best, Michael
> >
> > From: Ron Getty
> > To: LPSF-ACTIVISTS ; Libertarian Yahoo Group ; CAL-LIBS
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 7:30 AM
> > Subject: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner Publishes My Ant-War On
Terror
> > LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
> >
> > Dear Everyone;
> >
> > Yesterday Jay Ambrose a SF Examiner columnist had an article on
the
> > War on Terror. I used the article to point out some important
> > facts about the war on terror and why we had the fight and what
to do
> > to stop it.
> >
> > The Ambrose column:
> >
> > http://www.examiner.com/a-
> > 102579~U_S__must_stiffen_resolve_to_win_war_on_terror.html
> >
> > My LTE with Libertarian affiliation:
> >
> > http://www.examiner.com/a-103727~Letters__May_10th__2006.html
> >
> > Ron Getty
> > SF Libertarian
> >
> >
> > Letters: May 10th, 2006
> >
> > War on terror
> >
> >
> > Jay Ambrose claims World War III is the war on terror ("U.S.

must

> > stiffen resolve to win war on terror," May 9). Attacking a
worldwide,
> > multicause, religious-based ideology with technology will not

win

this
> > war. The reason for this mess is U.S. imperialism, forced

regime

> > changes and propping up dictators who support our policies

while

> > receiving America's largesse.
> >
> > One hundred fifty thousand U.S. soldiers are at 150 foreign
bases,
> > with another 160,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan. America does not
need to
> > be a latter-day imperial Roman Empire.
> >
> > To win this war, bring home U.S. troops and defend America's
borders.
> > Enact trade agreements instead of military agreements for a new
Pax
> > Americana free from war.
> >
> > Ron Getty
> > Libertarian Party San Francisco
> > The City
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED 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
> 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.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>

---------------------------------
  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 Ron,

Nope. Yep, chicken today, feathers tomorrow.

Marcy

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

Dear Marcy;
   
  Only time will tell on that one and the reaction to us and who

were are and how we are.

   
  I'm guessing tomorrow would not be a good time for us to do the

planned re-enactment of the Druid Summer Solstice Blood Sacrifices as
we had planned so there will be a fruitful harvest in the Fall. Hunh?

   
  Ron Getty
  SF Libertarian

"Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@...> wrote:
  Dear Ron,

I gave you my answers to your questions. Although I was addressing
primarily gender, I believe the same would hold true for color or
culture. Your comment regarding the Replublican Party does not

negate

my interpretation, since the RP is a lot older than the LP.

It takes time to achieve diversity in any group, I think. For the

LP

to become diverse so soon would take a lot of effort.

Let's see how we do tomorrow if the kids from Galileo High School
show up at our meeting as planned. How welcoming of "strangers"

will

we be? How willing to listen to their concerns? How attractive
to "outsiders" will our general demeanor be?

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@>
wrote:
>
> Dear Marcy;
>
> Thanks for the response. Although Dr. Mike as to wine Mike and
UCSF Mike was responding as a clinical psychologist and trying to
adapt the psychology of personality types to Libertarianism.
>
> I too feel there is a gender problem and what would it take for

a

program to not only attract women but also more members in all

areas.

>
> Not wanting to label - but how many Asian members do we have?
Black members? Hispanic and so on??? Why this dearth in such a
cosmopolitan City as San Francisco.
>
> Way back in my old Republican party days we did have member
diversity here in the City. If Republicans can do this why not
Libertarians???
>
> What is it - if there is an it - which can be done to increase
our membership across spectrums of sex race creed color religion

etc

etc etc etc???
>
> Ron Getty
> SF Libertarian
>
> "Amarcy D. Berry" <amarcyb@> wrote:
> Dear Ron,
>
> Sorry for my delay in responding to your request that I "provide
some
> insight" into the scarcity of women Libertarians; I was too busy
> empathizing :wink:
>
> OK, here goes:
>
> 1. First, go back to square one regarding the gender difference

of

> synthesizers vs empathizers. That does not holp up. There are
> enough matriarchal societies (women are the system builders) to
> support my assertion. So are the hundreds of women small

business

> owners (system builders), including myself. Also, given the

sorry

> state of the LP, it does not look to me that a lot of system
building
> has been going on here. So, the fact that there are no women
> Libertarians because their emphathizing characteristics make them
> better suited to be Dems or Greens does not ring true for me.
>
> 2. So, then why? It might just be a selective mechanism going

on.

> Perhaps the founding group preferred the confort that comes with
> sticking with people who are most like you, and since the LP is
> relatively new, that self selection is still strong, perhaps
> unconsciously intimidating women that might want to join.
>
> 3. Assuming a change to a more diverse population is desired,
which
> I think it is, how do we achieve this? One way might be for the
men
> in the group to make a concerted effort to bring women in their
lives
> to meetings, socials, tabling, etc. I remember Mr. Rogers from
PBS's
> Mr. Roger's Neighborhood used to emphasize that little boys and
girls
> need to see people that look like them in gender, color, physical
> attributes, etc. I think that goes for everybody.
>
> I would be interested in hearing from others on this, since I
> personally feel that the gender lopsidedness of the LP is not
> conducive to its strengh.
>
> Marcy
>
> --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Ron Getty <tradergroupe@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Dear Dr. Mike;
> >
> > Yes I am thank you!
> >
> > BTW does that self-aggrandizement make me a candidate for

some

> clinical sociopathic psychology??? Or is it just psychosis of the
> cerebellum?
> >
> > Second BTW: Has anyone done a mental mapping of the kind of
> people who become Libertarians and what kinds of waco loco

dreamer

> oners become Libertarians?
> >
> > Third BTW: What is it with women and Libertarianism? It seems
the
> Repubs and Demos have a lot more women attending almost but not
quite
> equally in numbers to men. But Libertariansim and women???
> >
> > Marcy maybe you could offer some insight???
> >
> > Ron Getty
> > SF Libertarian
> >
> > dredelstein@ wrote:
> > Ron,
> >
> > Magnificent!
> >
> > Best, Michael
> >
> > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 6:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner
> Publishes My Ant-War On Terror LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
> >
> >
> >
> > Dear Starchild;
> >
> > Actually by defending our borders what I meant was building a
50"
> tall wall around Washington DC.
> >
> > Locking inside all members of the Executive and Congress and
all
> the people working at all the agencies.
> >
> > Disconnect their telephones and internet.
> >
> > Then use the military to patrol 24/7 around the wall.
> >
> > From time to time toss food scraps over the wall to keep them
> slightly ravenous.
> >
> > Build a scaffold near the top so people could come and look
down
> at the Morons of Mordor.
> >
> > Then force them to build bonfires of all the idiot

regulations

> Washington has issued since Washington became Washington.
> >
> > Now that would be a border worth defending.
> >
> > Ron Getty
> > SF Libertarian
> >
> > Starchild <sfdreamer@> wrote:
> > Ron,
> >
> > I'll second Michael on both the congratulations and the comment
> about
> > "defend America's borders." In the context of the controversy
over
> > migration, talk about "defending the borders" could easily come
> across
> > as anti-immigrant, although I'm sure you just meant have U.S.
> > government troops defend the U.S. rather than be deployed in
other
> > countries.
> >
> > Also, please do not post to both the lpsf-discuss and lpsf-
> activists
> > lists unless it's something *really* important; many people
> subscribe
> > to both and will get such emails twice. The lpsf-discuss is
> probably
> > the more appropriate list, as lpsf-activists is for core party
> business.
> >
> > Yours in liberty,
> > <<< starchild >>>
> >
> >
> >
> > > Ron,
> > >
> > > Congratulations on your publication of another great LTE!
> > >
> > > Questions: You say: "defend America's borders." I haven't

heard

> > > of anyone attacking the U.S. Govt's borders, have you? Is

there

> a "war
> > > on borders?"
> > >
> > > Best, Michael
> > >
> > > From: Ron Getty
> > > To: LPSF-ACTIVISTS ; Libertarian Yahoo Group ; CAL-LIBS
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 7:30 AM
> > > Subject: [lpsf-activists] SF Examiner Publishes My Ant-War On
> Terror
> > > LTE With Libertarian Affiliation
> > >
> > > Dear Everyone;
> > >
> > > Yesterday Jay Ambrose a SF Examiner columnist had an article

on

> the
> > > War on Terror. I used the article to point out some important
> > > facts about the war on terror and why we had the fight and

what

> to do
> > > to stop it.
> > >
> > > The Ambrose column:
> > >
> > > http://www.examiner.com/a-
> > > 102579~U_S__must_stiffen_resolve_to_win_war_on_terror.html
> > >
> > > My LTE with Libertarian affiliation:
> > >
> > > http://www.examiner.com/a-103727~Letters__May_10th__2006.html
> > >
> > > Ron Getty
> > > SF Libertarian
> > >
> > >
> > > Letters: May 10th, 2006
> > >
> > > War on terror
> > >
> > >
> > > Jay Ambrose claims World War III is the war on terror ("U.S.
must
> > > stiffen resolve to win war on terror," May 9). Attacking a
> worldwide,
> > > multicause, religious-based ideology with technology will not
win
> this
> > > war. The reason for this mess is U.S. imperialism, forced
regime
> > > changes and propping up dictators who support our policies
while
> > > receiving America's largesse.
> > >
> > > One hundred fifty thousand U.S. soldiers are at 150 foreign
> bases,
> > > with another 160,000 in Iraq and Afghanistan. America does

not

> need to
> > > be a latter-day imperial Roman Empire.
> > >
> > > To win this war, bring home U.S. troops and defend America's
> borders.
> > > Enact trade agreements instead of military agreements for a

new

> Pax
> > > Americana free from war.
> > >
> > > Ron Getty
> > > Libertarian Party San Francisco
> > > The City
> > >
> > >
> > > SPONSORED 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
> > 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.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>

---------------------------------
  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.