Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:36:42 -0700 (MST) From: lpaz-govcom@yahoogroups.com Reply-To: lpaz-govcom@yahoogroups.com
i agree with your logic 100%.
but the point i was trying to make is that ALP INC is actively seeking registered voters for ALP. not for ALP INC.
and that ALP INC is not asking people to register as ALP INC.
so in effect ALP INC is saying "were not ALP INC we are really ALP".
may months ago i went to a ALP INC meeting at the phoenix library. just to throw a monkey wrench into things i asked them which libertarian party they were. they lied and said there was only one libertarian party in arizona.
when i mentioned the law suit between ALP and ALP INC they again lied an said they were the only libertarian party. i didnt bother telling them i was a member of the ALP party\ which they were suing.
>>
>>
>> let me get this straight.
>> rver.matchcraft.com
Connection: INC but ALP INC has zero registered voters >> in arizona. and when the sharon paper work crew up gets fixed by
>> the pima county government ALP INC will have one registered voter
>> in arizona (at least untill sharon comes back to ALP)
>>
>> 2) ALP INC has gotten lots of new voter registrations for ALP but
>> has gotten ZERO new voter registrations for ALP INC.
>>
>> 3) im not a legal expert but does the lawsuit ask that all ALP
>> voters be classified as ALP INC voters in a indirect manner?
>
>ALP, Inc. claims that ALP and ALP, Inc. merged at the '99 ALP
>convention. Thus, ALP, Inc. claims that "LBT" registered voters are
>registered for ALP, Inc. Judge Meyer's ruling means this is not the
>case. As long as Meyer's ruling stands, ALP, Inc. has no registered
>voters.
>
>--Jason Auvenshine
-- "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty " Thomas Jefferson
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: lpaz-govcom-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/