I have also suggested to Mark that if he is really adventurous, then he
should start the XXX party. Every candidate on the ballot would have XXX by
their name. He could recruit strippers for candidates. Elections would be
far more interesting if you have candidates like Mercedes or Lexus out
debating issues. They could raise money for their campaign accounts in
interesting ways such as lap dances.
Just A Thought,
James Coakley
>From: Dave Doubleday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [LVOF] Re: mark violates forum standards again, brian
>Date: Sat, 1 Jul 2006 08:01:55 -0400
>
>That I would consider joining. I don't always agree with mark, but if his
>party took on his own character, at least apathy and procrastination
>wouldn't be a problem.;-) (Not that you have such a problem James)
>
>Dave
>On Friday, June 30, 2006, at 05:07 PM, James C wrote:
>
>>If Mark decides he doesn't want to be in the alp, I can try to encourage
>>him
>>to start yet another state libertarian party in florida.
>>
>>James
>>
>> >From: Dave Doubleday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >Subject: Re: [LVOF] Re: mark violates forum standards again, brian
>> >Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2006 08:16:00 -0400
>> >
>> >It would be just too interesting if the alp picked up Mark and
>>Franklin!;-)
>> >
>> >Dave
>> >On Thursday, June 29, 2006, at 11:41 PM, johndavidlofgren wrote:
>> >
>> >>mr coakley if you want a guy that callz others an asshole in your
>> >>group, that is fine.
>> >>
>> >>no one tried to shut mark up, we asked for decorum, check the thread.
>> >>
>> >>if anything, i thought, as did $, that brian blamed us too much for
>> >>"causing" mark to spew his asshole talk.
>> >>
>> >>people need to accept responsibility for their own behavior,
>> >>especially in a forum where there is no physical contact, only verbal
>> >>exchanges. i speak only to peoples' posts, not their personalities
>> >>or their other behaviors.
>> >>
>> >>mark made the grave mistake of documenting a lie of the forum. now he
>> >>calls others names out of frustration. that is his problem not mine.
>> >>no one will miss him here.
>> >>
>> >>jdl
>> >>
>> >>--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "James C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Mark,
>> >> > I totally agree with your statement. They insult you, then
>> >>you
>> >> > defend yourself, then they they claim you attack them and try to
>> >>shut you
>> >> > up. It seems to be the same scenario in many different situations
>> >>throughout
>> >> > the lpf, and they wonder why many of us started our own libertarian
>> >>party. I
>> >> > remember what you did in 2002 and greatly apprecciate the effort. If
>> >>you are
>> >> > interested in what we are doing in the alp, just send me an email to
>> >>this
>> >> > web address.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> > James Coakley
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > >From: "meckert1960" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> > >Subject: [LVOF] Re: mark violates forum standards again, brian
>> >> > >Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 18:45:31 -0000
>> >> > >
>> >> > >I insinuated that John Lofgren was an idiot!
>> >> > >
>> >> > >The rules say no personal attacks. I haven't attacked anyone.
>> >> > >All I did was insinuated that John Lofgren was an idiot! Where does
>> >> > >it say that you can't insinuate that John Lofgren is an idiot?
>> >> > >Where does it say that you can't post the truth? I don't back down
>> >> > >from any fucking body. If that asshole is going to totally and
>> >> > >completely say whatever the fuck he wants about me and completely
>> >> > >misrepresent me and your going to say I can't defend myself then
>>you
>> >> > >all can go to hell.
>> >> > >
>> >> > >JOHN LOFGREN - You are an ASSHOLE!
>> >> > >
>> >> > >MSE
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "Brian Bustamante" <libertydisciple@>
>> >> > >wrote:
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Though I see where Mark might get heated after your
>>misconstruction
>> >> > >of
>> >> > > > what he was saying, I do agree with you on this one John.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > Mark, please refrain from personal insults against others on the
>> >> > > > forum, no matter how well deserved you think they may be.
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > SB
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "johndavidlofgren" <jlofgren@>
>>wrote:
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > brian can you ask mark to escalate his innane posts from
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > "are you an idiot?"
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > "your last question is completely assinine"
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > to something more becoming of a libertarian forum?
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > jdl
>> >> > > > >
>> >> > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "meckert1960" <markseckert@>
>>wrote:
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > Of course you left out the linking sentence. A dead person
>> >> > >can't get
>> >> > > > > > habeas corpus but one who was sentenced to life can.
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > what your reason for that John? Is it because your an idiot?
>> >> > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "johndavidlofgren" <jlofgren@>
>> >> > >wrote:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > mark, this post may be your most illustrative:
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > "death is different"
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > "if you can't figure it out i don't know what to tell you"
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > "you last question is completely assinine"
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > that was 3/4 of the post.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > you effectively gave no reason for your position, said it
>> >> > >can't be
>> >> > > > > > > defended, then said someone else's reasonable question is
>> >> > >assinine.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > i think readers can gleen a great deal about you from this
>> >> > >post.
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > jdl
>> >> > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "meckert1960" <markseckert@>
>> >> > >wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > Death is different. It you can't figure that one out I
>> >> > >don't
>> >> > > > > > know what
>> >> > > > > > > > to tell you. A dead person can't get habeas corpus but
>>one
>> >> > >who
>> >> > > > > > was
>> >> > > > > > > > sentenced to life can. Your last question is completely
>> >> > > > > > ASSININE!!
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "hrearden_hr" <HRearden@>
>> >> > >wrote:
>> >> > > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "meckert1960"
>><markseckert@>
>> >> > > > > > > > > wrote:There is no way the State can fairly
>> >> > > > > > > > > decide who should die and who should live.
>> >> > > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > > How do you know there isn't a way? Suppose there are
>>100
>> >> > > > > > witnesses
>> >> > > > > > > > who
>> >> > > > > > > > > saw a murder take place and there is a video of the
>> >> > >murder
>> >> > > > > > clearly
>> >> > > > > > > > > showing the murderer. When someone commits murder they
>> >> > >have
>> >> > > > > > decided
>> >> > > > > > > > > that someone should not live. What do you think should
>> >> > >happen
>> >> > > > > > to a
>> >> > > > > > > > > person who makes that decision? Do you believe that it
>>is
>> >> > >also
>> >> > > > > > unfair
>> >> > > > > > > > > for the state to decide that someone should be in
>>prison?
>> >> > > > > > > > >
>> >> > > > > > > > > $
>> >> > > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups email.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6pRQfA/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
