LPA Elections

[Guest guest]

Just My Opinion:

In my early years, when it came time for national elections, I was a

" yellow dog Democrat " , and believed in pulling one lever. (Ask a fellow Texas,

what

the term " Yellow Dog " means.)

However, as I have matured, I am beginning to believe in mixed tickets,

wishing I could vote for a candidate, and not the party. I do not like

slates, as

it gives the impression that all of the candidates on one ticket believe the

same way.

Now, in LPA, we are having the same process. What happened to the idea

that each person had their own ideas, and win or lose, we would accept

the outcome?

With that in mind, this is my opinion at this time. Please feel free to

disagree, as I am sure you will, but please try to disagree without being

disagreeable.

I believe that Matt, and the present officers (yes, I guess this is a

slate) should be allowed to continue what they started. Yes, feelings were hurt,

and mistakes were made, but sometimes in an eagerness to make a change, we

sometimes forget that others also have agendas that are as important. In fact, I

did not always agree with how matters were handled.

I also believe that " the other ticket " should be kept up to date as to the

business of LPA at this time, so, in case, there is a change, there will be

a smooth transition. I think Matt, has offered that as a suggestion, but I may

be mistaken. If I am wrong, then Matt, please take my suggestion to heart:)

Also, " you may say that I'm a dreamer " - Lennon ?- but why not all

candidates make the affirmation, that there will be no mud slinging and

blame-only discussion of issues.

Oh, I forgot, there is going to be a message board where the election can

be discussed, so, moderators, feel free to delete this or save it for the

proper channel.

Beth

PS: Don't go and get your underwear all twisted in a knot. I sent a copy to

Matt, since he no longer subscribes to the list serv, so RELAX!

[Guest guest]

-----I believe that Matt, and the present officers (yes, I guess this

is a slate) should be allowed to continue what they started. Yes,

feelings were hurt, and mistakes were made, but sometimes in an

eagerness to make a change, we sometimes forget that others also have

agendas that are as important.----

beth,

Technically, those officers (those still around) from the

administration that was elected the last time are finishing their

term in July. No one guarantees any administration that if they start

projects that will take longer to implement than their term, that

they will be in office to see them to their completion. (Ask

the 'other' Bush.) Isn't the idea that each administration adds their

own ingredients to the pot?

Terms are limited and this is the opportunity for us to say if we

believe that LPA and those in its leadership positions are serving

our needs OR if it's time to give others an opportunity. Unless

there is a bylaw change in the future, there could be a complete

change every time there is an election. Because this doesn't seem to

have been the norm in the past doesn't mean it couldn't/shouldn't

happen now. My belief is that if the membership thought the terms

should be longer than a change in the bylaw would have been suggested

sooner.

And how long do they 'continue' what they started? Will even 2 terms

be enough? In my opinion the 'importance' of the agenda is in the

eyes of the beholders, mostly what is needed is an agenda of

fairness, equality, integrity and respect for all, not just some.

Just take the time to speak to , Leslye and Dave, as well as

the recently created by very short lived Human Resources Committee

then decide if this is the administration that should contine.

And perhaps the opposing candidates aren't necessarily a 'slate',

maybe some are running because they want to continue in office.

Perhaps they want to serve LPA without concern for who their fellow

officers are. I guess we will see if they appear as a 'slate'.

-----What happened to the idea that each person had their own ideas,

and win or lose, we would accept the outcome?-----

I don't think any of the candidates will walk away if the entire

slate doesn't win. I didn't see the " all or none " announcement on

www.lpa4people.org, but I do see a " team " who is committed to seeing

LPA achieve the next level in success. I see a team of diverse

individuals who have the 'unity' of LPA and it's members in mind, not

a unity of 'the one' type government in mind.

And if the entire slate doesn't win, then this will at least give the

board some much needed checks and balances. And hopefully a

diversity in the leadership voting on your behalf who have their own

ideas, goals and beliefs.

That was all that I was seeking in all of the messages you saw

shooting back and forth around 5 weeks ago. I am thrilled to see them

step up to the challange of leading LPA, as you can see by my

endorsement listed under District 2.

My 5 cents,

Interim Nat'l Senior VP

LPA

PS. I recently posted this question and link on another list:

" What misinformation brings " , read the copied 'letter to the editor'

and I ask you if some need to 'continue'.

Who wants to be associated with a group of folks whose claim to fame

seems to be a (misrepresented) high unemployment rate and 'amazing'

phone skills. Public perception by other dwarfs is just as important

as continuing to educate those who are not in our 'community'.

From: http://www.portlandtribune.com/archview.cgi?id=23932

I am a dwarf in Portland who is not a member of the Little People

of America, and does not want to be (Upwardly mobile, Weekend Life,

March 26). I was a member in the past. I think they do a lot of good

work, but found their insularity disturbing.

I found it interesting that your article stated that 85 percent of

LPA's membership does not work, but depends on disability benefits. I

have always considered it a point of honor to stand on my own two

feet and have never wanted to apply for disability. While I have

experienced periods of unemployment in a poor economy, I have always

tried to get back to work as soon as possible.

My point is, now that the LPA is moving to the metro Portland

area, I would ask that the average-sized members of the community

resist the temptation to stereotype the 10 percent of short-statured

persons outside the organization with the 90 percent who have joined.

The LPA speaks for most, but not all, of the short-statured

individuals in the United States. Please keep an open mind about the

natures and values of the remaining 10 percent, and treat each of us

as individuals.

I saw your article and my first reaction was " Oh, no! " Now I am

going to have more people trying to lump me with this group, when I

wish to be recognized as an individual. Previously, when LPA

conventions came to town, I made myself scarce from the downtown area.

I am a scientific researcher who identifies with people of like

mind, rather than like body. I would ask that strangers meeting me on

the street keep that in mind.

Laurel R.

Northwest Portland

> Just My Opinion:

>

> In my early years, when it came time for national elections, I

was a " yellow dog Democrat " , and believed in pulling one lever. (Ask

a fellow Texas, what the term " Yellow Dog " means.)

However, as I have matured, I am beginning to believe in mixed

tickets, wishing I could vote for a candidate, and not the party. I

do not like slates, as it gives the impression that all of the

candidates on one ticket believe the same way.

Now, in LPA, we are having the same process. What happened to the idea

that each person had their own ideas, and win or lose, we would accept

the outcome?

With that in mind, this is my opinion at this time. Please feel free

to disagree, as I am sure you will, but please try to disagree

without being disagreeable.

I believe that Matt, and the present officers (yes, I guess this is a

slate) should be allowed to continue what they started. Yes, feelings

were hurt, and mistakes were made, but sometimes in an eagerness to

make a change, we sometimes forget that others also have agendas that

are as important. In fact, I did not always agree with how matters

were handled.

I also believe that " the other ticket " should be kept up to date as

to the business of LPA at this time, so, in case, there is a change,

there will be a smooth transition. I think Matt, has offered that as

a suggestion, but I may be mistaken. If I am wrong, then Matt, please

take my suggestion to heart:)

Also, " you may say that I'm a dreamer " - Lennon ?- but why not all

candidates make the affirmation, that there will be no mud slinging

and blame-only discussion of issues.

Oh, I forgot, there is going to be a message board where the election

can be discussed, so, moderators, feel free to delete this or save it

for the proper channel.

> Beth

PS: Don't go and get your underwear all twisted in a knot. I sent a

copy to Matt, since he no longer subscribes to the list serv, so

RELAX!

[Guest guest]

Okay, you are right.

Re: LPA elections

> , you wrote:

>

> >

> > BTW-- Nice back peddling on Matt... you were the one who aired the

> > most on him.

>

>

> Once again I think you're getting your Bradfords confused. I know

> there are

> THREE of us, but we all sign our first names at the bottom of the

> emails.And I never once retracted anything I've said, nor tried to

> defend what

> others have said. I've always tried to take a balanced perspective

> on the

> various political rumblings within this organization, and I've

> always tried

> to stick to the issues, and not make my responses personal. Matt

> knowsthis, and we've had private discussions via emails several

> times since the

> last election. In fact, I will be seeing him next month at our

> regionalconference, and we are planning to get together and talk

> about programs that

> could benefit LPA. I, as well as Matt, are willing to look

> forward, and not

> dredge up past disagreements. Holding onto grudges never benefits

> anyone.

> In a court of law there's Liable or nothing.

> >

> > It's like Guilty or not guilty.

> > Bordering on Liable does not a lawsuit make.

>

>

> Well there is such a thing as smart, stupid, and borderline stupid.

> Who was

> talking of lawsuits? Who was talking about courts of law? I've

> been an

> newspaper editor and am well-versed in what constitutes libel and

> slander.When I say " borderline libel " I mean just that. Your

> words, in a certain

> context, could have been construed as libelous in my judgment and

> experienceas a former editor. I'm not the one who threatens

> lawsuits or court

> action. I'm just holding you accountable for your " back-peddling. "

>

> -BILL Bradford (the other one).