Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 03:58:19 -0700 From: pls@thekeep.com (Paul Schauble) Subject: Re: [lpaz-discuss] Current State of the ALP To: lpaz-discuss@yahoogroups.com Reply-To: lpaz-discuss@yahoogroups.com
With all due respect, John, I think you're off on a tangent.
The bylaw in question requires all members of the governing committee to maintain a certain status as a requirement on being on the committee. Jason stipulated to being a member of the ALP, Inc. board, so there are no questions there. Jason argues that ALP, Inc. isn't a political party. That was argues at length on this group and on the governing committee mailing list for about two weeks before the meeting at which he was expelled. Nobody except Jason buys that.
Criminal law or administrative law isn't the appropriate model, IMHO. And the removal isn't disciplinary, but for failing to meet a continuing requirement of office. This is more like a college having a rule that you must maintain a 2.5 GPA or your are expelled. Should there be a fact-finding hearing after your grades get too low?
++PLS
John Wilde wrote: >
> I never said the facts don't care. But before you get to the
> facts you
> have to be legally entitled to present the facts. Jason wasn't. Life
> isn't
> fair. Get over it.
>
> It is the process I go through all of the time. More cases than I
> can
> count were dismissed, and the dismissal was upheld by the appellate
> court,
> without ever getting to the point of presenting any facts or evidence
> to the
> court.
>
> That concept doesn't change, just because it is a political party
> instead
> of a court of law. If we start compromising on the principle of law,
> because
> we think it gives the appearance of not being fair, then we are lost.
> If
> there is one thing libertarians are supposed to be known for is no
> compromise, even when it may not be fair.
>
> And therein lies the rub. In the name of compromise of principle,
> the
> ALP has been taken into the throws of a battle for its very
> existence. I
> will not compromise on principle because it might make someone feel
> better.
> Either we live by the principles that got us here to where we are
> ready to
> rebuild or we compromise those principles and guarantee our certain
> death as
> a party.
>
> I can just about guarantee that we are going to be sued at least
> twice in
> the near future, by the LNC and possibly Inc. Had we compromised the
> rule of
> law with Jason, as is being suggested, I can guarantee you that it
> will be
> used against us in those suits. Everything that Liz did in addressing
> the
> situation with Jason, was thoroughly discussed with legal counsel and
> as a
> knowledgeable paralegal I concurred. Liz hashed, rehashed and worked
> it
> again many times over before making the decision she did. She did not
> make
> it in a vacuum as many have suggested.
>
> So I say again. Life isn't always fair. Get over it. When
> applying the
> law, we are not looking for fairness, we are reaching for justice.
> What is
> just, isn't always fair. You want a just decision, do the law, don't
> practice and don't complain because it doesn't seem fair.
>
> g'day
> John Wilde
>
> fractor@swlink.net wrote:
>
> > I want to weigh in belatedly on the matter Jason Auvenshine has been
> > pursuing:
> >
> > "I think the _process_ by which ALP, as an organization, arrived at
> > the decision to boot me off the GovCom is fundamentally flawed. It
> > was very clear that no one else shared that concern at the
> > convention. It is very clear that the only people on this list who
> > share the concern live outside the state. I find that disturbing for
> > reasons totally unrelated to whether or not Inc. is a party." -
> Jason
> > Auvenshine, Wed, 06 Jun 2001
> >
> > I live in Arizona, and share his concern for some sort of just
> > process in the way the ALP is run. I find it totally disturbing to
> > hear people like John Wilde say that facts don't matter. That's
> like
> > the courts telling people that "actual innocence" is not a valid
> > argument for appealing prison or even death sentences. ("a claim of
> > actual innocence is not itself a constitutional claim." - Chief
> > Justice William Rehnquist)
> >
> > John Wilde is fond of proclaiming that that's the way the law and
> > courts work, and fairness is not an issue (Jason should
> > stop "complaining about whether the process is unfair"). I say it
> > should be, and what better place than to start within the ALP? If
> > not here, how can we expect better in the society we are trying to
> > change?
> >
> > I have been following the on-going debates on ALP, Inc. and LPUS for
> > six months now, and agree that a lot of bad stuff has been
> > perpetrated by both those organizations. That fact, however, does
> > not make the ALP's actions right or just.
> >
> > Aside from the questions of fairness of the lawsuits from ALP, Inc.,
> > and the shenanigans of certain people in the national LP and the
> > Browne campaigns, where is the proclaimed high ground of he ALP?
> >
> > As reported by Jason, at the convention Ernie Hancock summed up the
> > feelings of the delegates, "it was short, sweet, and hard to beat".
> > And exclusive, apparently. That seems to be the current hallmark of
> > the ALP - avoid bringing in anyone besides the in-crowd, especially
> > if they might have a different view of how to operate.
> >
> > That was why I - mistakenly, I now realize - voted for ALP, Inc. two
> > years ago - because they were the only group that deigned to
> > communicate with the rest of us Libertarians in Arizona. Unless one
> > knows about the LPAZ-Discuss group, a Libertarian wouldn't even know
> > the option of attending the ALP convention existed. And that
> > apparently suits the "leadership" just fine.
> >
> > And no, it wasn't really national that disaffilated the ALP, in
> spite
> > of the current myth. It was the voice of Libertarians across the
> > state, who, faced with a choice of who they thought best represented
> > them, picked ALP, Inc. If the ALP had communicated with the rest of
> > us, perhaps most others, like me, would have voted differently.
> >
> > (It occurs to me that the ALP leadership actually wanted the LPUS to
> > disaffilate them, with all the gloating over that fact I have seen.)
> >
> > But, wait, I hear repeatedly stated in this forum, most of the
> people
> > who voted in that referendum weren't even registered Libertarian
> > voters, anyway. It seems to me that if the ALP really wanted to
> > represent registered Arizona Libertarians, there would be some
> effort
> > to communicate with them, and, yes, even those who are just members
> > of national.
> >
> > According to Robert Anderson, the ALP is "the ballot accessed party
> > that represents the libertarian voters of this State." But doesn't
> a
> > representative actually communicate with and LISTEN to those he
> > purportedly represents?
> >
> > In spite of the questionable tax-funded status of the precinct
> > committeeman system, it does at least have the benefit of being more
> > than a closed (to the rest of us) system. And to have attended and
> > had my voice heard (and actually considered), I would have had
> > to "pack" the convention, which Ernie and the rest clearly didn't
> > want. I should have, anyway, and added at least my voice to Jason's
> > concerns over the current steamroller. Mea culpa, Jason.
> >
> > The ALP may be better than the ALP, Inc., but not that much better,
> > in my opinion, not as long as fairness, justice, and openness are
> not
> > among its values.
> >
> > Community email addresses:
> > Post message: lpaz-discuss@onelist.com
> > Subscribe: lpaz-discuss-subscribe@onelist.com
> > Unsubscribe: lpaz-discuss-unsubscribe@onelist.com
> > List owner: lpaz-discuss-owner@onelist.com
> > Web site: www.ArizonaLibertarian.org
> >
> > Shortcut URL to this page:
> > http://www.onelist.com/community/lpaz-discuss
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> [www.debticated.com]
>
>
> Community email addresses:
> Post message: lpaz-discuss@onelist.com
> Subscribe: lpaz-discuss-subscribe@onelist.com
> Unsubscribe: lpaz-discuss-unsubscribe@onelist.com
> List owner: lpaz-discuss-owner@onelist.com
> Web site: www.ArizonaLibertarian.org
>
> Shortcut URL to this page:
> http://www.onelist.com/community/lpaz-discuss
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Community email addresses: Post message: lpaz-discuss@onelist.com Subscribe: lpaz-discuss-subscribe@onelist.com Unsubscribe: lpaz-discuss-unsubscribe@onelist.com List owner: lpaz-discuss-owner@onelist.com Web site: www.ArizonaLibertarian.org
Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/lpaz-discuss
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/