…was ejected from a Libertarian National Committee (of which she is a member) meeting for livebogging the meeting. Then the LNC voted to ask for her resignation.
Now, on a human level, I’m mildly sympathetic. I’ve never met Angela, but from her writings I could categorize her as a royal pain in the ass, and Not A Lady. However, every organization, and especially the LNC, needs a PITA. And under what rule does the LNC think they can expel a duly elected member for what amounts to “We don’t like you”? This is an outrage. Given that these folks are allegedly acting in my name, I think that liveblogging (and the meeting videos that they’ve decided to destroy once the minutes are approved) is my due, so that I can keep an eye on my representatives. But the new and improved Watergage culture demands even bigger tape gaps than Nixon’s.
I’m waiting to see how this plays out before I send in my resignation. I’ve had it.
UPDATE 3:30: I may have underestimated her:
We should be laughing. Our detractors are clowns. As I am fond of saying, getting kicked out of the LP is like fired from a titty bar. It doesn’t go on your permanent record. No one in the outside world cares.
September 8, 2008 at 2:22 pm |
I have met Angela, she is a lady, a free spirit, and she calls them like she sees them. I’m proud she’s my friend and rep, and proud to know her.
September 8, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
Star chamber procedures are no way for a supposedly libertarian organization to operate. Did you ever wonder why the LP has gotten exactly nowhere since 1980? This is not the first time something like this has happened. It has happened many times, but since there are no LP archives there is no way for you to know for sure.
September 8, 2008 at 2:50 pm |
Well, John, that’s the key: there is no transparency. Why not? And that does seem to be Angela’s main issue…which I am behind 100%.
September 8, 2008 at 8:50 pm |
I have to assume that when you categorize Ms. Keaton as “not a lady,” you’re using a definition something along the lines of “a woman of refined or gentle manners.” In actuality, she’s quite personable in that respect when the situation calls for it.
Matter of fact, that may be the crux of the current matter: Apparently some of her fellow LNC members misinterpreted her poise as a sign that she could be manipulated or, if necessary, just pushed around without repercussions. Big mistake.
September 9, 2008 at 12:33 am |
Isn’t this the lady who was on I-S once upon a time clamoring proPalestinian stuff?
A committee member liveblogging might be construed as not focusing on her responsibilities as a committee member, so they have a small point on their side. But she pwns them on the major issue. Maybe it does need a Republican takeover, so the anarchists will be motivated to start a new and better organization.
September 9, 2008 at 12:20 pm |
Tom,
No, I was thinking more along the lines of “wears her sexuality on her sleeve”. As for manipulable, I never got that impression from her writings, and I’d have to question the sanity of anyone who did.
K- no, you’re thinking of Carol Moore, who is several degrees too wacked to ever be elected to LNC.
September 11, 2008 at 4:45 am |
i do believe the LNC ruled that it encouraged open communication in the Lark years.