[Peace-discuss] Tony's comments

Mon Oct 19 07:56:19 CDT 2009

Thanks, John-- no, the fringe lunatics are OK;  in fact, I appreciate hearing their points of view.  No, I just don't have the time to devote to all that interests me.  I still work full-time in the E.R., and the campaign is a second full-time job.  Receiving no funding from a national Party, and taking no money from lobbyists, forces me to work incredibly hard to get my message out through a true grassroots approach, to a wide area encompassing 22 counties.

Best wishes,
David

________________________________
From: John W. <jbw292002 at gmail.com>
To: David Gill <docgill37 at yahoo.com>
Cc: E.Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>; unionyes <unionyes at ameritech.net>; Peace-discuss List <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
Sent: Mon, October 19, 2009 7:46:58 AM
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments

Sorry to hear you're leaving the listserv, Dr. Gill.  Not driven away by the fringe lunatics in the group, I hope?

I'll vote for you, anyway.  You may be a fish in E. Wayne Johnson's marvelously witty metaphor, but Tim Johnson is a chameleon, constantly measuring which way the political wind is blowing.  He stands for nothing of value as far as I'm concerned, and never has.

I do wish you'd reconsider your stance on Afghanistan.  We've got no business there, period.  But it's not like your opinion actually MATTERS.  We're already building the two largest "embassies" in the world, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it's abundantly clear that we fully intend to maintain some sort of military presence in the middle East until we're thrown out on our asses by a combination of indigenous resentment and crushing internal debt.

Politics on the national level isn't based on fact, even if it were possible to agree on what "fact" is; it's based on emotion and money.

Best wishes to you,

John Wason

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 7:28 AM, David Gill <docgill37 at yahoo.com> wrote:

The factual errors in Mr. Johnson's post are numerous:
>
>1-- Mr. Stewart recommends far FEWER troops in Afghanistan, not more, as Mr. Johnson posts;  I would encourage him to re-read the transcript and to try to post accurately, as I'll soon be leaving this listserv, and thus unable to edit his mis-statements.
>
>2-- Laughably, I am described as a "partisan adherent" and Mr. Johnson states that I will "follow the Democrat party line submissively" -- I argue for reducing forces in Afghanistan by roughly 75%.  I argue for complete prompt withdrawal from Iraq.  I argue for the extension of Medicare to all American citizens.  Does Mr. Johnson think that these are mainstream messages of the Democratic party?  If so, he has far better knowledge of the National Dem Party than I.  I take not a penny from the Party, and nor do I adhere to their messages of expansion in Afghanistan, delay in Iraq, and continued genuflecting before the insurance industry.
>
>     Mr. Johnson describes his support of our sitting Congressman; obviously, I strongly disagree with his position.  Hundreds of thousands lives ended, money wasted that could have been used for (literally) a century's worth of free college for all Americans-- these are part of Mr. Johnson's legacy.  And to stand quietly by while someone dies in this country every twelve minutes just because they lack health insurance-- no, indeed, to crow that this death every 12 minutes system is the "best health care system in the world"-- well, it's beyond me how someone purportedly interested in the well-being of his fellow man can be supportive of such a Congressman. 
>
>David Gill
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: E.Wayne Johnson <ewj at pigs.ag>
>To: David Gill <docgill37 at yahoo.com>; unionyes <unionyes at ameritech.net>; Peace-discuss List <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>Sent: Sun, October 18, 2009 1:44:50 PM
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments
>
>I am pleased to say that Tony Pomonis is my friend, and I am encouraged by that fact.
>
>I read the transcript of Rory Stewart's interview on the Moyers show.
>
>The main thing that I gleaned from it is that Stewart is suggesting we need more troops in Afghanstan because the slippery Al-Qaida is now in Pakistan. If there was some other take-home message that I missed, then a clarification is welcome.
>
>I am reminded that a young man bearing a clipboard passed by me about a year ago and suggested that the terrorists were in Afghanistan, therefore I should vote for Mr. Obama, who should be encouraged by my vote to pursue those terrorists into their lairs in Afghanistan.  I suspected this might be a teachable moment for this slight young Democrat.  I explained to him unequivocally that the real terrorists we had better be concerned about were not holed up in Afghanistan or Iraq or Iran or Pakistan but were actually entrenched in the environs of Washington DC.  I further explained that Mr. Obama seemed to be as much of a terrorist as his colleagues and doubted that there was any utility at all in my voting for him.
>
>I would turn this same spotlight on Dr. Gill just as Tony Pomonis has done, but I would add this.  I am actually not a great fan of Timothy Johnson.  I truly can't stand Johnson's NeoCon campaign manager, which could be ample reason for me to doubt Mr. Johnson's faculties of judgment.  But indeed that Johnson seems to be at present voting pretty much the way I want him to (against the bailouts, against FISA, against the War in Afghanistan, and for an Audit of the Federal Reserve).  Far be it from me to oppose a congressman who is voting the way I want him to, regardless of how he may have acted in the past.  Mr. Johnson has gone against the mainstream Republican agenda, in what appears to be a pursuit of principles and listening to his constituents.  Repentance is still a virtue, not a weakness, and a wise man is generally said to change his mind at times.
>
>On the other hand, Dr. Gill makes it clear that he is a partisan adherent to the gills.  A vote for him would be a vote for sustaining the War, and indeed Dr. Gill seems to indicate that he will follow the Democrat party line submissively unto the ultimate sacrifice of principles.
>
>Methinks we have been "gillflirted" quite enough already.
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "David Gill" <docgill37 at yahoo.com>
>To: "unionyes" <unionyes at ameritech.net>; "Peace-discuss List" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 10:00 AM
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments
>
>
>Regarding Iraq: I was publicly against our involvement there from the time I began my initial campaign in December, 2002, and I have always opposed our involvement there.
>
>Regarding Afghanistan, I oppose the concept of "nation-building" there through military action, and I view issues related to the Taliban as items that should be dealt with by the Afghani people themselves-- their opinions of the Taliban vary widely, and I don't think it is the business of America to be involved with their internal decisions.
>
>I support drawing down American forces, leaving in place a relatively small number of Special Operations Forces, to prevent the re-establishment of Al-Qaida training camps. I would encourage all to watch the interview with Rory Stewart on "Bill Moyers Journal" :
>http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/09252009/profile.html
>
>David Gill
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: unionyes <unionyes at ameritech.net>
>To: Peace-discuss List <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>; David Gill <docgill37 at yahoo.com>
>Sent: Sat, October 17, 2009 1:52:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments
>
>So what is your position on Afganistan ?
>
>Maybe I was misinformed !
>
>Do you support a TOTAL U.S. military ( including the U.S. government paid mercenaries, Blackwater et al. ) withdrawl from BOTH Afganistan and Iraq ?
>
>David J.
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "David Gill" <docgill37 at yahoo.com>
>To: "unionyes" <unionyes at ameritech.net>
>Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 11:53 PM
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments
>
>
>David J.: Not at all clear how you've dragged me into being a supporter of the occupation of Iraq-- I've publicly viewed this as a farce since before its inception. And the consequences of that occupation are far too calamitous for me to be as forgiving toward Mr. Johnson as Mr. Estabrook seems to be.
>
>To repeat: there is no "party line" into which I buy. When any of you walk from one end of Afghanistan to the other, by yourself, and spend the time first-hand with an extremely wide variety of Afghani people, in 500 villages, I'll likely accord the same respect to your opinion on the subject as I currently do Mr. Stewart's.
>
>David Gill
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: unionyes <unionyes at ameritech.net>
>To: Peace-discuss List <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>Sent: Fri, October 16, 2009 6:14:02 PM
>Subject: Fw: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "unionyes" <unionyes at ameritech.net>
>To: <illyes at illinois.edu>
>Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 6:11 PM
>Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments
>
>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Let's be objective about this !
>>
>> WE ( The U.S. Government ) have NO right to have invaded Afganistan and WE certainly do NOT have ANY right to continue to occupy THEIR country !
>>
>> Gill is excellent on the Health Care issue, BUT, he is buying into the " party line " about the continued corporate imperialistic occupation of BOTH Afganistan and Iraq !
>>
>> The wars of terror ( NOT the war on terror ) is continueing and being EXPANDED under Obama, and you know Bob as well as I do, that the money, murder, and mayhem, that we perpetuate abroad, is that much less that is available to spend here at " home " ( in the U.S. ) for Health Care, Green Jobs, etc..
>>
>> David J.
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: <illyes at illinois.edu>
>> To: <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 5:24 PM
>> Subject: [Peace-discuss] Tony's comments
>>
>>
>>> Sorry, Tony. I didn't notice your email till Dave Johnson reposted it.
>>>
>>> It can be argued that we owe the Afghans. We and the Russians trashed their country in a proxy war. I am of the opinion that just leaving is the best plan, but I would not reject out of hand having a small military presence for the single purpose of providing security for infrastructure projects using aid money supplied by us..
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how radical a Libertarian you are, but since you supported Costas, a Green, I suspect you find arguments such as the above at least worth considering.
>>>
>>> Bob

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20091019/6b115432/attachment-0001.html