Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 17:35:05 -0700 From: AZGovernor@Earthlink.net ("AZ Governor's Race 2k2") Subject: Re: [lpaz-discuss] Re: Values To: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com
I agree with your thoughts, and probably would echo them. The reason for the conflict is because from the very start I made a plan, (which ended up just like things did), but in getting there I was tempted to part from it. I purposely left the door open to gain access to the forums, to side-step the reporting requirements and to hopefully generate controversy/publicity. To my dismay, nobody outside a small group even cared. :-( I said I could not make a public decision until it was real, i.e. that I was absolutely certain that 'I could qualify', and I continue to believe that a declaration prior is a hollow one and just too easy to be credible, like, "I don't want to win the Indy 500". C.D. was right, I didn't want to take possession of the $5.00 money unless I was ging to turn it in and accept CE funding--that's why I took pledges. It became scary when the pledged forms/money was coming in at close to a 100% on the promises. I actually had to face the fact that it was an absolute certainty that I would qualify, and ultimately, I chickened out---I just couldn't do it. Was it a philosophical decision? I'm still not sure--I just couldn't do it, personally.
I have not shied from the fact that there were a few occasions when, if I could do it that day, I may well have The 18th of August (when I wrote the 'Got Freedom?' e-mail) was one of them, and I was sincere in making my only real attempt to see what would come of it. Your confusion is a reflection of my confusion. I hate to say it, but I'm only human and sometimes subject to such vacillation. If an apology is in order then, I do apologize, but at no point was I engaged in deliberately going back and forth.
My imaginings of 'burning the check' simply weren't possible for all those pesky technical/legal reasons.
In retrospect, I should say that Dave may have had the best idea. I do have to give him credit ( begrudgingly ;-). But I just never thought of making up my own forms and getting 4,000, $5.00 'protest' contributions completely outside the Clean Elections. I'm still not sure I would have received the help or could generate the enthusiasm I'd have needed to do it, so we'll never know. I handled it the best way I could. I don't know what else to say about the whole thing, that's all there is.
I appreciate the even-keel you have kept, and 'd like to think that were I in your shoes, I'd have done the same. But being one of the players, I was enthused, disappointed, uplifted and all kinds of other things, mainly as a result of the constant (always negative with the exception of Steve T.) speculation, distortion and outright lies perpetrated by the 'wreckers' who seem to think they have a lock on the 'l' word. I'm a builder, not a wrecker. I want to take the party forward, not destroy it or just hold ground. I don't want to be the third servant in the parable of the talents. I actually believe in the Libertarian philosophy, but it's useless unless we get out and bring in others. I've never been interested in joining another intellectual social sit-around club...that's why I lost interest in the famous one. And I will keep my commitment to do all I can to forward the cause of freedom, with or without your vote.
Sorry for the confusion.
As always, Barry
----- Original Message ----- From: "auvenj" <firstname.lastname@example.org> "AZ Governor's Race 2k2" <AZGovernor@E...> > wrote:
> > Suffice it to say that, yes, I was able to qualify for funding at any
time > > in a Janet Napolitano sort of way (she used the unions). Yes, the lies
and > > insinuations almost led me to do it on more than one occasion. (In my
> > 'pro/con' assessment--to piss Ernie off was the only thing in the 'pro'
> > column) And, no, my heart wouldn't let me. I'm glad it's over.
> I'm really sorry to hear that Barry, because in that context I
> consider your appeals for the contributions (the fundraising letter
> and the email) to be grossly misleading.
> As a reader of those appeals, I had the distinct impression that you
> were doing everything in your power to qualify. I was led to believe
> that my help was urgently needed in order for you to be able to
> qualify. If, in fact, you could have qualified at any time then IMHO
> you were not justified in conveying the impression that more
> contributions were needed for the purposes of qualifying.
> I'm sure that it can be justified on a technical basis. I'm not
> interested in parsing sentences and I'm not accusing you of outright
> fraud. There's no benefit to be gained for freedom by doing so. But
> I'm telling you...I believe I and everyone else who received either
> the fundraising letter or the email was led to believe something that
> you now claim wasn't true: that you genuinely desired to qualify,
> and you were doing everything you could do to qualify.
> Sticking by my man, NOTA...
> --Jason Auvenshine
> Community Web Page:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> 4 DVDs Free +s&p Join Now http://us.click.yahoo.com/pt6YBB/NXiEAA/MVfIAA/JdSolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Community Web Page: http://groups.yahoo.com/community/lpaz-discuss
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/