[Peace-discuss] Michael Lerner

[C. G. Estabrook]

"Am I the only one who doesn't get the Lerner flap? Let me get this
straight. Lerner goes around bashing ANSWER publicly. ANSWER returns the
favor by not inviting him to speak at their San Francisco rally Feb 16
(and Lerner himself says he never even *wanted* to speak). ANSWER then get
depicted as totalitarian Kim Jong Il wanna-bes, with implied charges of
anti-Semitism thrown in for good measure. Lerner's weakness for anything
that puts him in the spotlight isn't news. But the way this has become a
rallying cry, including a letter demanding Lerner be allowed to speak
signed by all sorts of lefty luminaries, is baffling."

	--Chris Kromm <ckromm at mindspring.com>, in a posting to
lbo-talk at lists.panix.com, seems to me to have it right, except that the
charges of anti-Semitism are explicit, not implied.


On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Jim Buell wrote:

> What strikes me as most interesting about this whole brouhaha is that Bob 
> McChesney is listed as the second signer of one of the big petitions to get 
> Lerner onto the podium (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0211-09.htm 
> - "Let Anti-War Rabbi Michael Lerner Speak"). I wonder if someone who knows 
> McChesney better than I might get in touch with him to find out more about 
> his views.
> 
> jb
>