Allan Wallace wrote: AW) I am still not happy with your posting our discussions on another group! If I want my opinions on another group I will put them there myself. It is extremely impolite to post someone's opinions elsewhere without their permission. (AW
OutrightLibertarians is a public forum, readable by anyone with an Internet connection, and devoted exclusively to commentary about public political topics. It clearly falls within Fair Use for me to quote anything said here for the non-commercial purpose of political commentary. There is no question that my quotes have always been fair and in context. 'Politeness" does not dictate that I'm not allowed to comment anywhere else on what I read here, and I will continue to do so. Further, I consider it a courtesy to those I'm replying to here that I use a cc: to indicate where else I'm commenting about them, so that they may respond there if they wish. Your only possible reasonable objection to my practice would be that if it were causing an unwelcome volume of cross-posting from people who read the other forum but not this one. However, there has never been a single such cross-posting. If seeing the cc: of the other forum is nevertheless so (conveniently) objectionable to you, I will endeavor to remember to use a bcc: instead of a cc:, since your belaboring this issue has made it sufficiently clear to the few who might care that this is my practice. Fair notice has been given. AW) How often is the platform committee recommendations accepted, as is, on controversial topics? Not very often in my experience. (AW This alleged fact is no basis for you "realizing" that gay rights will be in danger of removal from the Platform in Denver, and is a very flimsy basis for you ignoring the clear evidence to the contrary. It's just daft to suggest that the delegates in Denver are going to opt for a Platform that says even LESS than what the PlatCom draft will say. AW) There can be amendments or movements to eject whole sections or individual planks from the floor. And, they did not have the votes to remove it last time, but they have been gaining ground since then. (AW The old Sexual Rights plank came in 9th out of 61 in the 2002 voting, received 81% approval in the 2004 voting, and was almost exactly in the middle in terms of plank popularity in 2006 -- a year that non-reformers claim was an aberration unlikely to be repeated. Again, I'd love to know precisely who you think "they" are, and what specifically makes you think "they have been gaining ground" against Platform gay rights since 2006. AW) We need to stop the LP from becoming the Party of slightly more Principle than the Republican Party. (AW canard n. an unfounded or false, deliberately misleading story My takedown of the above propaganda stands unrebutted at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OutrightLibertarians/message/3120 . Here it is again: The Republican Party makes no effort to reverse all the myriad laws regulating prices, minimum wages, maximum hours, equal pay, plant closure, family leave, hiring, firing, occupational licensure, insurance policies, zoning, rents, product safety, drug efficacy, fuel efficiency, pollution mitigation technology, parental media control, media copying technology, etc. The GOP failed to use its legislative majority to start privatizing any of our socialized systems of education, health care, health insurance, agriculture, and retirement savings. The GOP supports regulations and bans on gambling, suicide, substance use, pornography, gay marriage, sexual services, reproductive services, and cloning. To compare moderate Libertarians to the Republican Party is at best obtuse, and at worst is -- well, something the censors here don't allow us to talk about. Brian Holtz http://LibertarianIntelligence.com <http://libertarianintelligence.com/> Signal Intelligence About The LP
