[statecom] out of town, unavailable till mid day tomorrow - concerns - not standing aside

[Lawrence Fine]

o   will prevent us from reaching quorum at the 6/29 State Committee  
meeting

my concern should be worded with "may" instead of will

o   gives the appearance of a partisan effort to seize additional
convention delegates for a favored candidate

totally agree, not that it makes much difference to me.

o   is stacking the special State Committee meeting and is increasing  
division

that is the vibe I get - - - agree.

o   candidates have not introduced themselves to the State Committee
or answered questions as to why they want to serve.  Cannot evaluate
the honesty and moral courage based on names.  Minimal commitment of
participating at one face-to-face State Committee meeting should be
required

Jim Hammerman wrote:

"Many of the proposed StateCom representatives have been part of the  
party
for a number of years and have therefore met current StateCom members.
They are all activists who share our values,"

My comment:

Jim, from what I've been witnessing here, "we" don't even share "our"  
values.
Again, I'll be glad to accept new members to the state Committee who  
show up at the state convention.

Jim wrote:

" who are being sponsored by
two current GRP members, mostly from their region or identity caucus.  
This
sponsorship by members to fill vacant seats so that these regions can be
represented obligates us to seat them."

o   the counter-productive nature of bringing diversity into the Party
via cyberspace

Again and again, I'll be glad to accept new members to the state  
Committee who show up at the state convention.
this may also insure that we reach quorum


lastly and not leastly


over and out till tomorrow afternoon - - - - - - - - -
peace and love - - - - - - - - - l