[Peace-discuss] [Discuss] [CentralILJwJ] Fw: Fw: What hath got rot?

[C. G. Estabrook]

This is simply dishonest.  I invite readers to read the earlier posts in 
this thread (which I began and named ) to see if I have "taken the 
anonymity of the remark and chosen to own it."

Melodye Rosales wrote:
>  Tristan---I agree with what you say---but let me make it clear---I am
>  not in battle with with anyone.  More to the point, I intentionally
>  left my "Naysayer" nameless--and I cannot take responsibility for
>  someone who has taken the anonymity of the remark and chose to own
>  it.  An interesting decision within itself, nonetheless, my intention
>  was not to label a named individual as much as questioning underlying
>  motives. With that in mind, I believe Marti summed it up well.
>
>  I assume there is a general lack of awareness by some--- that there
>  are other folks on these listservs, who are married, work or are
>  retired from UIUC and who are in tax brackets that a Bill, such as
>  the Health Reform, will dig a little deeper into their pockets then
>  those of the middle and poverty class.  But if folks want to put
>  their name on the "Naysayer" label, that is a choice they control,
>  not me.
>
>  Moving on... What I hope is that "Naysayers" won't distract from the
>  purpose of such an important forum.  Therefore, Tristan is correct to
>  encourage personal debates that are absent any points of interest to
>  the Health Reform, kept off these general discussions.
>
>  That said, it is important to note---for this and future
>  forums---what a "Naysayer" is and why I used the term. * A Naysayer
>  is one who frequently engages in excessive complaining, negative
>  banter and/or a genuinely poor and downbeat attitude. Naysayers are
>  distinguished by their tendency to consistently view the glass half
>  empty, make frequent one-way trips to negative town, and constantly
>  emphasize the worst of a situation. They have the capacity to rant
>  and whine for hours on end about the most insignificant
>  inconveniences. They tend to travel solo, but have the keen ability
>  to spread their pessimistic attitude to a group of unsuspecting
>  bystanders and encourage others to employ their mindset.
>
>  Naysayers tend to blend in with those around them rather well,
>  granted they have learned over the years to adapt to their
>  surroundings. However, when the opportunity arises, their true nature
>  will be exposed and they will stop at nothing to exclude others or
>  bring a general sense of negativity to any situation.
>
>  Not to be confused with non-Naysayers (as I intended to present
>  myself in the earlier emails) who fight against the negativity
>  brought forth by Naysayers, make the best of a situation and are not
>  afraid to call out a Naysayer on the spot. *
>
>  Now,  spiraling back to the Health Reform discussion--- I thought
>  that John W's comments responding to Claudia's second email were on
>  point.  It was refreshing to read John's pro and con take on the
>  user-friendly information extracted out of labyrinth of legal
>  maneuvers, concessions, and revisions the Health Care Bill has
>  evolved from since it was originally brought to the table.
>
>
>
>  On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Tristan B <tristan.bunner at gmail.com>
>  wrote:
>
> > I was referring to both of you.  If you want to fight about
> > personal stuff, do it off list please.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 1:33 PM, C. G. ESTABROOK <cge at shout.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Don't be too hard on Ms. Rosales.  I think she thought that she
> >> was making a political comment, however inappropriate it was.
> >>
> >>
> >> Tristan B wrote:
> >>
> >>> Can we keep personal conversations between whoever is part of
> >>> them?
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 12:48 PM, C. G. Estabrook
> >>> <cge at shout.net<mailto: cge at shout.net>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> This is getting a bit creepy, Melodye.
> >>>
> >>> Am I to understand that someone emailed you with observations
> >>> about my net worth - and you posted them - because of things
> >>> I'd written about politics?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Melodye Rosales wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Oops!  Did I say a quarter of a million?  I misspoke----someone
> >>> privately emailed to correct me------Correction to previous
> >>> email:
> >>>
> >>> Silly me----I meant to say, more than a half-million
> >>> (conservative estimate) in C-U property alone ----add to that
> >>> personal assets, medical insurance packages from the University
> >>> times two, University pension packages times two----  So, I
> >>> guess that makes their combined package putting them in the (or
> >>> close to---or above) millionaires?
> >>>
> >>> just clarifying...



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.