<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Carl,<br>
I do believe that has been the case, ad nauseum.<br>
<br>
As usual you have your eyes fixed on a distant forest and are
missing the looming oak in your path.<br>
<br>
This is a matter of association. Do we want to continue a very
lop-sided conversation where you dominate the discussion, belabor
valid points into meaningless mush with your
Chicken-Little-Leftism, and repeatedly lash out at the few people
willing to consider your point of view until they toe your exact
line in the dirt? I think not. There is a spectrum of solutions to
this matter and you alone at this point determine which path will
be taken. Don't try to shift the blame for your lack of
collegiality onto the backs of long-suffering readers here.<br>
<br>
BTW, just to make a point of order, this is the SF-core list,
where we'd like to focus on material of particular interest to
active members of SF as a group. Given the marked lack of interest
in discussing your Big Idea of the Day and the fact it is of
little documented interest to list members in its current form,
the vast majority of what you post would more appropriate there.
If you really want a proper place to post your screeds that have
no direct bearing on the work in our hands, then please use the
sftalk list instead, easily available at:<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sftalk/">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sftalk/</a><br>
<br>
And a final observation. As someone with considerable experience
in solidarity work and engagement, I've always found it best to
not assume what those who I am in solidarity with want. The very
worst thing I've found that some can do to help them is to appear
to be an irrational, grouchy scold. It misrepresents those who I
seek to help and dishonors their strong voice for respect at a
human level.<br>
<br>
Carl, <br>
I'm not sure anymore that I want you speaking up for me, no matter
what the circumstances, let alone being associated with me.
Whatever the cause, you've shown a penchant for aggravating
people, rather than bringing people together. In fact, if I were
to close my eyes and hear you speaking what I read as your tone, I
get the distinct feeling that you've taken the people you claim to
care about hostage, have a gun to their head, and are urging me to
do your bidding. <br>
Mike<br>
<br>
On 3/22/2013 3:30 AM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:7CF22B17-C78E-494E-B72C-49FD60DC5FAA@newsfromneptune.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
Mike--
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In the original (suppressed) preface to Animal Farm, George
Orwell wrote, "If liberty means anything at all, it means the
right to tell people what they do not want to hear."</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Was he right? </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards, Carl
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>On Mar 21, 2013, at 10:20 PM, Mike Lehman <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:rebelmike@earthlink.net">rebelmike@earthlink.net</a>>
wrote:</div>
<div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Carl,<br>
Just going to answer this one reply, figgerin' we're
both just covering well-plowed ground already...<br>
<br>
BTW, no need to personally CC me a copy, either. I read
SF just fine. For now.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 3/21/2013 9:14 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:0D6ED048-34B6-471C-B6FC-16472B933FE4@newsfromneptune.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<div>Shouldn't we be discussing why it is the case that,
ten years after the largest antiwar demonstrations in
history, the USG is able to spread murder and torture
around the world - particularly in the Mideast and
North Africa - without let or hindrance, except from
its victims?</div>
<br>
</blockquote>
Yeah, that is a big problem. Not sure what I have to
contribute, given this is hardly a pre-revolutionary
situation or one where the nth angry email is likely to
help. The one thing I won't do is continuously harangue
the people willing to listen to me about an issue.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:0D6ED048-34B6-471C-B6FC-16472B933FE4@newsfromneptune.com"
type="cite">How has the domestic anti-war movement been
so neutralized? The article* referred to in the subject
line provides part of the answer, and yes, identity
politics provides some more. ("Opposition to Obama is
racist!") <br>
</blockquote>
Quite aware that Obama is still a hero or symbol to some.
If my folks were dragged to this country in chains, etc,
etc, and somehow a fellow that looks remotely like me, who
might have a clue about what white skin privilege is, but
who can also see things from my point of view....in a
country where the politics of just about anything hardly
rises above the level of fighting over the roadkill possum
we need for dinner because we can't come to terms
officially with the idea that food and a warm spot out of
the weather might be a human right...got elected, then I
might still be celebrating, whatever the heck you think I
should be making my first priority.<br>
<br>
I am sure that some opposition to Obama is racist. Do you
really think that's not the case? On the other hand,
sometimes it's a matter of priorities at a personal level.
Frankly, I'm glad that so many folks are starting to
awaken to the need to protect their own interests. When
they all get to the state of doctoral degrees, plenty of
decent healthcare, and the luxury of time and resources
often needed to start worrying about others, then maybe
you'll have better luck communicating with the people
you're blamin'...jus saying.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:0D6ED048-34B6-471C-B6FC-16472B933FE4@newsfromneptune.com"
type="cite"><br>
The child-killer in the White House will not be
restrained until enough Americans become aware of the
crimes their government is committing in their name,
though not in their interest. It will take a movement
like that for civil rights or against the SE Asian war
to reverse the Bush-Obama war policy. <br>
</blockquote>
I would suggest you aim a little higher in term of
eyeballs on the screen counts than SF or Peace-D. You're
obviously not working hard enough or maybe you need a
media consultant to help you shape your message so it's a
little more, ummm, digestible.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:0D6ED048-34B6-471C-B6FC-16472B933FE4@newsfromneptune.com"
type="cite"><br>
The Obama administration is aware of that - see Obama's
discussion of the Vietnam war in The Audacity of Hope -
and determined that such an opposition shall not
develop. They'll stop at very little - note their
actions in regard to Wikileaks and the Occupy movement,
the assassination program and indefinite detention
without trial.<br>
<br>
We should be working on ways to stop them. --CGE<br>
</blockquote>
If your personal failure to communicate in a way that
compels people to come together and act against evil, then
it's awfully hard to work on ways to stop anything we'd
rather not happen. If you were really worried about
political effectiveness, I wouldn't be wasting my time to
write this right now. <br>
<br>
May I suggest your very own email list, where you can
pontificate to all willing to listen? <br>
<br>
I'd be happy to make arrangements, give you the keys and
walk away and let you do your thing. Just let me know. The
only thing I want is for you to take the 98% of stuff
that you repost here and has shown to be of so little
interest that you'd get more reaction by dropping a
pebble in a well. I think you're a smart guy and realize
that most of these folks simply aren't interested in
talking with you so long as you continue your
sanctimonious, grinding, graceless, annoying,
counter-productive, ineffective, and, yes, increasingly
vapid tone. So I guess it's just more important to you to
condemn the most likely people to do something about what
you care about. Not sure how that advances things. Maybe
you need a nice long retreat, plenty of prayer and
abstention, sweat out all the bad stuff?<br>
<br>
Maybe it's just me. I'm a tad sensitive this week to this
sort of thing. I just went through an ugly divorce with
two lists I've been deeply involved with, in one case for
16+ years. It involved one crotchety old geek who had a
personal beef with a list member. For a long time, he
stayed on the one list and my friend stayed on the other.
They'd had words before offlist and the old fart just
would not keep this tangentially related conflict
off-list. The problem was the list owner of both lists
kind of thought the jerk's right to be off-topic,
insulting, and yes, even a clumsy-stupid blackmail attempt
that turned virtually everybody who hadn't already made up
their mind to say I'm outta here -- all clearly against
list rules BTW -- was more important than the right of
the rest of us not to hear about his obsession with
abusing my friend everyday. <br>
<br>
Well, as it turns out, the jerk and the owner are pretty
tight. Most of the folks who actually post on one or both
lists thought the owner was bat-shit crazy (I won't go
into details, trust me, your stuff may been intended to be
incredibly irritating, but you still have some anchor in
reality) to keep him around after that and, well, we've
made other arrangements. No need for further details
except this...<br>
<br>
I will not be the one to subject my fellow listmembers to
crap that they clearly aren't interested in and which as
far as I can tell is posted here mostly to annoy and
irritate. Trust me on this, Carl, these folks have their
own computers and are smart enough to use Google to find
out more what interests them -- and to figure out that
you've drawn ever closer to outright bullying. Are we
really all accomplices to murder? Heck, I've been working
against this sort of stuff since I was 15. "I could've
been a contender!" if not for all this radical shit. That
never bothers me except when I have to listen to your
guff, so tuning you out will likely solve this personal
failing of mine. This is not to say that I or they aren't
interested in Palestine, warmongering presidents elected
under false pretenses, or even abortion and the pope --
but I'm pretty sure at this point they aren't interested
in engaging with you on these matters.<br>
<br>
Do you want to know how bad it is? You being here right
now is about like Hamas hiring (resurrecting?) bin-Laden
and making him their press secretary. Anyone who know the
players knows how ridiculous that is. If the shoe fits,
wear it.<br>
<br>
So why is there some sort of line in the sand looming?
Because I'm the list owner here and I don't want to be a
jerk like the guy I was just telling you about and insist
on subjecting list members to the latest revisions of the
same old arguments I know I've heard many times before. So
why is this a problem?<br>
<br>
SF has a long and proud history of not purging people.
It's something I'm proud of and don't want to change. But
I find myself increasingly tempted to send your membership
info to the SF list File 13 as a personal failing of mine.
Since I don't want to do that, I'd appreciate it if you
take me up on my offer of your own list for general biting
and scratching at that powers that be and refrain from
doing so here.<br>
Thanks,<br>
Mike<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:0D6ED048-34B6-471C-B6FC-16472B933FE4@newsfromneptune.com"
type="cite">_______________________<br>
*<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/15/the-progressive-movement-is-a-pr-front-for-rich-democrats/">http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/03/15/the-progressive-movement-is-a-pr-front-for-rich-democrats/</a>>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span><Mail Attachment.jpeg></span><br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
On Mar 21, 2013, at 7:30 PM, Mike Lehman <<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rebelmike@earthlink.net">rebelmike@earthlink.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">On 3/21/2013 6:30 PM, C. G.
Estabrook wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite">The leaflet is attached;
it was circulated by members of AWARE.<br>
The objections were directed (as my article
describes) at those of us who had earlier
circulated a flyer critical of Obama at his
"town meeting."<br>
The substance of that flyer is contained in the
article: <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.counterpunch.org/2005/09/29/illinois-anti-warriors-and-the-attractive-senator/">http://www.counterpunch.org/2005/09/29/illinois-anti-warriors-and-the-attractive-senator/</a>>.<br>
Everyone is not/was not mad at me. Identity
politics was (and is) an issue...<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Carl,<br>
Yeah, that could be a long discussion. In fact, it
was a discussion <br>
probably started around 1969. Looks like we're
making quick work of that <br>
one as the American left, which I presume is
different from them durn' <br>
"liberals."<br>
<br>
In its latest iteration here, at least you're only
trying to settle <br>
things from 2005, when Obama was still wiping the
moisture from behind <br>
his ears as the very junior senator from the Land
of Lincoln.<br>
<br>
How is being firmly stuck in the past going to win
us victory tomorrow? <br>
I think even Lenin would be starting to look
around and think more about <br>
when the seminar will be dismissed so he can get a
beer than listen to <br>
the instructor recount his own grad school
ideological conflicts for the <br>
nth time.<br>
Mike<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>