From: cavasin@convex.com (Vince Cavasin)
Subject: Re: NRA excludes Libertarian
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 21:14:10 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

First a little background for t.p.g readers: Kevin has developed a great deal
of contempt for me in the last week, as is fairly apparent from his tone here.
I'm not exactly sure why he carries this grudge; the only thing I can figure
is that he can't accept the fact that I won't agree with his ideology.  I
suppose I might have hurt his feelings in a discussion in a convex-local
newsgroup, and that's why he's out to get me, but it seems more likely that
he'd just like me to publicly state that he's right.  When he is right I try
to do that, but when he's wrong I have no choice but to defend my views.

I wouldn't resent his vehement attacks, but generally he resorts to quoting me
out of context, misrepresenting my statements, deleting relevant statements
that he (apparently) has no counter-argument for, and twisting my arguments so
that he can disagree with them and argue for the sake of arguing.  I fail to
see the usefulness in these tactics, but like I said, I will defend myself.

Kevin Langston <langston@convex.COM> writes:

>lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) writes:
>>
>>Mmmm, I think you're being unfair here.  Vince's complaint is not that the
>>NRA should be publicizing the LP, but that the NRA is engaged in irresponsible
>>reportage.  It's debatable, but (at the risk of putting words in Vince's
>>mouth) how about: "To report on the positions of only the two-party candidates
>>when significant alternatives exist in many races is as much a disservice
>>as Election News Service's rounding-up of the vote numbers to allow non-
>>reporting of alternative party results.

>    You're putting words in Vince's mouth that even Vince doesn't believe.

He's putting words in my mouth?  That's quite a condemnation coming from the
Master of Misrepresentation.  What, are you angry he's using one of your
debate techniques Kevin?

>    Notice how he said "This sort of policy..keeps Joe Average American
>    ignora[sic] the LP and its views." He didn't say "this is the kind of
     ^^^^^^ obviously a quoter truncation

>    policy that keeps Joe ignorant of alternative candidates." See, Vince
>    is a Libertarian first, and is only trying to get the NRA to recognize
>    the LP candidates as viable alternatives, not get them to report on
>    pro-gun candidates.

Honestly, the thought of other pro-gun candidates didn't cross my mind when I
made the original post, or I might have included them.  But nevertheless, am I
wrong to lobby for my party?

I commend you though, on actually not misrepresenting me this time as you did
so many times in convex.debate by saying I wanted an endorsement; that's quite
an improvement. 

The ILA policy stinks in my opinion FIRST because it doesn't include
the pro-gun LP, and second because it is biased against other parties in
general (maybe my priorities are warped, but at least I'm honest); however, it
is the ILA's right to cover who they want, and I respect that.  Again, it is
my right to petition this policy. 

>>Under the same logic, it's also arguable that the feature should also note 
>>that the American Nazi Party candidate is pro-control, the ACP candidate
>>is pro-control, etc. 

>    He has no interest at all in seeing other third party candidates'
>    positions recognized. He thinks that's up to their supporters.

It is up to their supporters.  I should lobby for them?

>    The two major problems I have with Vince's articles are, first, that
>    he is trying to get people outside the NRA (who have NO legitimate say
>    in what gets reported by the NRA to it's members) to try and influence
>    NRA policy. 

You're right; people outside the NRA don't have a place complaining about NRA
policies.  However, I'm sure there are at least a few people in net land that
might join the NRA if it weren't for policies like this.  My request for
non-NRA members to write letters probably didn't belong, but it might have 
gotten some non-members thinking about what the NRA would have to change to
get their support.  For that reason I don't regret including it.

>    Second, he doesn't care about other minor party candidates,
>    only HIS minor party candidate. That has nothing to do with the pro-gun
>    outlook, it's purely politics,  and we already have enough political
>    strife within the NRA.

It has plenty to do with the pro-gun outlook, hoss.  My PARTY PLATFORM is
pro-gun; I'm unaware of any other party that calls for the RTKABA as part of
its platform (go ahead enlighten me, it would be nice to see you post
something useful).  That makes my party very relevant to NRA members, and I,
as a Libertarian and NRA member, want to increase awareness of the LP among
NRA'ers.  So I write letters, and encourage others to do so too.

You are simply chasing me around the net posting derogatory comments in an
attempt to raise your own apparently low self-esteem, and that's quite
childish, really.

-vince
cavasin@convex.com