Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [NoIraqWar] Let's Go Fishing! On Reed and Commentators

Expand Messages
  • SAM ACKERMAN
    I won t boycott election either. I m training eQuipment managers for Cook County, so won t be partisan. Happy New Year! Sam MarilynMKC@aol.com wrote:
    Message 1 of 12 , Dec 31, 2007
      I won't boycott election either.  I'm training eQuipment managers for Cook County, so  won't be partisan.  Happy New Year!  Sam

      MarilynMKC@... wrote:
      I personally am not boycotting the election -- and think that the stakes are way too high. I actually believe that the fate of the earth is in question adn that it makes a difference (if you think that the fate of the earth is important) whether republicans - particularly, but not exclusively, apocalyptic, evangelical, christians, are in power or 'progressive democrats. 
       
      And while I have a strong preference for the one candidate who came out against the war before many on the national list serve did, I, personally, will most likely support the democratic candidate, no matter who, he or she is.
       
      Further, a boycott, will weaken, not strengthen the anti-war movement as any candidate will decided that we are virtually irrelevant at a moment when most people who are concerned about war, the economy, racism, choice, the environment, etc. will be doing just about anything to rid the nation of the republicans. -- 
       
      We will be far more relevant if we build the movement (which is not very strong at the moment as evidenced by October 27th) and show that if the candidate is responsive to a peace/justice platform, that we can produce for them. (which is still a question to them, and to me).
       
      It is always a mistake I think to overestimate one's strength and a boycott is evidence of just that kind of overestimation.
       




    • AShafton@aol.com
      This discussion seemed to have exhausted itself with unanimous disapproval of my proposal -- but since it s come up again, please take note of this crucial
      Message 2 of 12 , Jan 1, 2008
        This discussion seemed to have exhausted itself with unanimous disapproval of my proposal -- but since it's come up again, please take note of this crucial climax in the October 27 speech of Mayor Anderson of Salt Lake City which has circulated on this list-serve and been much praised, including by some who landed hard on my proposal. ~ Tony

        I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral
        breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say "No more"
        and mean it?

        I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot,
        and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities
        in Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit
        to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq.






        **************************************
        See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
      • Carl Davidson
        Personal morality is best linked to one s politics as the source of its values. One gets into trouble, though, when you make morality identical to politics, as
        Message 3 of 12 , Jan 1, 2008
          Personal morality is best linked to one's politics as the source of its values. One gets into trouble, though, when you make morality identical to politics, as the theocrats do. Politics is about how we can live together, which implies compromises, and 'Who-Whom?' (Lenin's pet definition), ie, Who can do What to Whom? This also involves alliances, direct and indirect, that imply some compromises.

          For instance, with all due praise to the Mayor of Salt Lake City, what would he do if there were a candidate that split the difference of his criteria, ie, stood for 'all troops out now,' but was wary on 'cut off all funds for war now'? Sort of like Richardson, at least in round one. Part of politics is not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, and part of moral teaching over the centuries is St Thomas on the lesser evil when no other choices are  present. Both are sound, but you have to think and wrestle with any given situation to apply them well.

          Anyway, that's 2 cents from one who would have been a philosophy professor had not the world burst into flames in the 1960s...

          CarlD



          On Jan 1, 2008 12:00 PM, < AShafton@...> wrote:

          This discussion seemed to have exhausted itself with unanimous disapproval of my proposal -- but since it's come up again, please take note of this crucial climax in the October 27 speech of Mayor Anderson of Salt Lake City which has circulated on this list-serve and been much praised, including by some who landed hard on my proposal. ~ Tony

          I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral
          breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say "No more"
          and mean it?

          I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot,
          and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities
          in Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit
          to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq.






          **************************************
          See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004 )


        • AShafton@aol.com
          Carl, my agreement is implicit in the open wording of my proposal: – that we boycott the Democratic Party nominee unless and until we extract from her/him
          Message 4 of 12 , Jan 1, 2008
            Carl, my agreement is implicit in the open wording of my proposal: "– that we boycott  the Democratic Party nominee unless and until we extract from her/him a public commitment to an acceptable program for ending the war" [italics added]. ~ Tony

            In a message dated 1/1/2008 12:04:52 PM Central Standard Time, carld717@... writes:


            Personal morality is best linked to one's politics as the source of its values. One gets into trouble, though, when you make morality identical to politics, as the theocrats do. Politics is about how we can live together, which implies compromises, and 'Who-Whom?' (Lenin's pet definition), ie, Who can do What to Whom? This also involves alliances, direct and indirect, that imply some compromises.

            For instance, with all due praise to the Mayor of Salt Lake City, what would he do if there were a candidate that split the difference of his criteria, ie, stood for 'all troops out now,' but was wary on 'cut off all funds for war now'? Sort of like Richardson, at least in round one. Part of politics is not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, and part of moral teaching over the centuries is St Thomas on the lesser evil when no other choices are  present. Both are sound, but you have to think and wrestle with any given situation to apply them well.

            Anyway, that's 2 cents from one who would have been a philosophy professor had not the world burst into flames in the 1960s...

            CarlD



            On Jan 1, 2008 12:00 PM, < AShafton@...> wrote:
            This discussion seemed to have exhausted itself with unanimous disapproval of my proposal -- but since it's come up again, please take note of this crucial climax in the October 27 speech of Mayor Anderson of Salt Lake City which has circulated on this list-serve and been much praised, including by some who landed hard on my proposal. ~ Tony

            I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral
            breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say "No more"
            and mean it?

            I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot,
            and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities
            in Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit
            to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq.




            **************************************
            See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
          • Carl Davidson
            I don t have a big disagreement here. Just over the word boycott . Personally, I m only encouraging support now for those clearly for out now, ie, Kucinich,
            Message 5 of 12 , Jan 1, 2008
              I don't have a big disagreement here. Just over the word 'boycott'. Personally, I'm only encouraging support now for those clearly for 'out now,' ie, Kucinich, Richardson and the Greens. I'm 'criticizing' and 'keeping the heat on',.as opposed to 'boycotting,' all the others until they do what you're saying they need to do, or we're presented with a different set of conditions.

              In the meantime, develop our strength  by intervening in a nonpartisan, non-endorsing way.

              --CarlD

              On Jan 1, 2008 6:23 PM, <AShafton@...
              > wrote:

              Carl, my agreement is implicit in the open wording of my proposal: "– that we boycott  the Democratic Party nominee unless and until we extract from her/him a public commitment to an acceptable program for ending the war" [italics added]. ~ Tony



              In a message dated 1/1/2008 12:04:52 PM Central Standard Time, carld717@... writes:


              Personal morality is best linked to one's politics as the source of its values. One gets into trouble, though, when you make morality identical to politics, as the theocrats do. Politics is about how we can live together, which implies compromises, and 'Who-Whom?' (Lenin's pet definition), ie, Who can do What to Whom? This also involves alliances, direct and indirect, that imply some compromises.

              For instance, with all due praise to the Mayor of Salt Lake City, what would he do if there were a candidate that split the difference of his criteria, ie, stood for 'all troops out now,' but was wary on 'cut off all funds for war now'? Sort of like Richardson, at least in round one. Part of politics is not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, and part of moral teaching over the centuries is St Thomas on the lesser evil when no other choices are  present. Both are sound, but you have to think and wrestle with any given situation to apply them well.

              Anyway, that's 2 cents from one who would have been a philosophy professor had not the world burst into flames in the 1960s...

              CarlD



              On Jan 1, 2008 12:00 PM, < AShafton@...> wrote:
              This discussion seemed to have exhausted itself with unanimous disapproval of my proposal -- but since it's come up again, please take note of this crucial climax in the October 27 speech of Mayor Anderson of Salt Lake City which has circulated on this list-serve and been much praised, including by some who landed hard on my proposal. ~ Tony

              I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral
              breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say "No more"
              and mean it?

              I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot,
              and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities
              in Iraq. I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit
              to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq.




              **************************************
              See AOL's top rated recipes ( http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)

            • John Osman
              My sentiments exactly. However, the troubles in Pakistan will give Bush and his cabal more fodder for their scare tactics. Hillary, who supported Bush and his
              Message 6 of 12 , Jan 2, 2008

                My sentiments exactly.

                 

                However, the troubles in Pakistan will give Bush and his cabal more fodder for their scare tactics. Hillary, who supported Bush and his Iraq war, has already soft pedaled her own style of scare tactic.

                 

                Look for shifts by weak, scared voters.

                 

                John (Jack) Osman

                630-879-6550 office

                630-879-6551 fax

                 


                From: NoIraqWar@yahoogroups.com [mailto: NoIraqWar@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of AShafton@...
                Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2008 11:00 AM
                To: NoIraqWar@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [NoIraqWar] Let's Go Fishing! On Reed and Commentators

                 

                This discussion seemed to have exhausted itself with unanimous disapproval of my proposal -- but since it's come up again, please take note of this crucial climax in the October 27 speech of Mayor Anderson of Salt Lake City which has circulated on this list-serve and been much praised, including by some who landed hard on my proposal. ~ Tony

                I implore you: Draw a line. Figure out exactly where your own moral
                breaking point is. How much will you put up with before you say "No more"
                and mean it?

                I have drawn my line as a matter of simple personal morality: I cannot,
                and will not, support any candidate who has voted to fund the atrocities
                in Iraq . I cannot, and will not, support any candidate who will not commit
                to remove all US troops, as soon as possible, from Iraq .






                ************ ********* ********* ********
                See AOL's top rated recipes (http://food. aol.com/top- rated-recipes? NCID=aoltop00030 000000004)

              • Robert M Roman
                As a practical matter, peace folks in Illinois may have some problems should they get to the voting booth. While the Illinois Democratic ballot has a fairly
                Message 7 of 12 , Jan 2, 2008
                  As a practical matter, peace folks in Illinois may have some problems should they get to the voting booth.

                  While the Illinois Democratic ballot has a fairly complete menu of candidates for President, in most districts you will only find delegate slates for Clinton and Obama. A few districts have fairly complete Edwards slates, and fewer have fragments of Richardson slates. I haven't checked for this election, but in the past, no delegates from Illinois were selected by the popular vote for the actual candidate. Does anyone here know about this year?

                  So, except for districts where there is a local contest of interest (e.g. the 14th Congressional District, and there are others) this may be good election to ask for a Green ballot or to spend the time, instead, organizing around some other issue. (Also, some of the delegate candidates are pretty worthwhile people even if the candidates they are supporting are not so much. That might possibly motivate a few people.)

                  be well,
                  bob roman

                  On Jan 1, 2008, at 5:41 PM, Carl Davidson wrote:

                  I don't have a big disagreement here. Just over the word 'boycott'. Personally, I'm only encouraging support now for those clearly for 'out now,' ie, Kucinich, Richardson and the Greens. I'm 'criticizing' and 'keeping the heat on',.as opposed to 'boycotting,' all the others until they do what you're saying they need to do, or we're presented with a different set of conditions.

                  In the meantime, develop our strength  by intervening in a nonpartisan, non-endorsing way.

                  --CarlD

                • ccegelis@comcast.net
                  Hi Delegates are not necessary to vote for President. If some one wins a delegate and there is no delegate on the ballot then the campaign can appoint someone.
                  Message 8 of 12 , Jan 2, 2008
                    Hi
                    Delegates are not necessary to vote for President. If some one wins a delegate and there is no delegate on the ballot then the campaign can appoint someone.
                    Christine
                    Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: Robert M Roman <robertmroman@...>

                    Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 09:05:55
                    To:NoIraqWar@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [NoIraqWar] Let's Go Fishing! On Reed and Commentators


                    As a practical matter, peace folks in Illinois may have some problems should they get to the voting booth.


                    While the Illinois Democratic ballot has a fairly complete menu of candidates for President, in most districts you will only find delegate slates for Clinton and Obama. A few districts have fairly complete Edwards slates, and fewer have fragments of Richardson slates. I haven't checked for this election, but in the past, no delegates from Illinois were selected by the popular vote for the actual candidate. Does anyone here know about this year?


                    So, except for districts where there is a local contest of interest (e.g. the 14th Congressional District, and there are others) this may be good election to ask for a Green ballot or to spend the time, instead, organizing around some other issue. (Also, some of the delegate candidates are pretty worthwhile people even if the candidates they are supporting are not so much. That might possibly motivate a few people.)


                    be well,
                    bob roman



                    On Jan 1, 2008, at 5:41 PM, Carl Davidson wrote:
                    I don't have a big disagreement here. Just over the word 'boycott'. Personally, I'm only encouraging support now for those clearly for 'out now,' ie, Kucinich, Richardson and the Greens. I'm 'criticizing' and 'keeping the heat on',.as opposed to 'boycotting,' all the others until they do what you're saying they need to do, or we're presented with a different set of conditions.

                    In the meantime, develop our strength  by intervening in a nonpartisan, non-endorsing way.

                    --CarlD
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.