Preacher? AA leader?
Well, Sister Miriam, you've gone and found me out.
It's true that I've spent many an hour warming my pew, but never as a
Preacher. And I've attended a considerable number of AA meetings over
the years, but never as an Alcoholic, but as support for one friend or
another, so I never felt it my place to speak or lead.
But I do have to admit that my years in state leadership in blind
organizations accomplished the same result. After years as an
activist, I've become practiced at opening my mouth and letting the
verbiage flow, usually followed by inserting my foot. "My Blind
Brothers and Sisters, rise up, join hands and raise your voices in
song. Amazing grace, how sweet the sound...I once was blind but
now...hmm...I still can't see". Oh well, I come by it honestly. I'm
the son of an opinionated man who never hid his little light under any
bushel basket.
One of my Mentors, Al Fisher, was the son of a Methodist minister. Al
came to know Atheism, and went about spreading the Gospel of "The myth
of Creation". He was an old time union organizer, and lent his
considerable talents to our state blind organization, even though he
was not blind. Al had the talent of leading from within. He taught
many of us how to organize, without himself needing to step into open
leadership. But along with this was his talent for talking the sox
off anyone who would listen. We told Al that he reminded us of the
old Methodist Missionary. I think that may have hurt his feelings.
I think of Al, especially today, following the much too early death of
Michael Ratner. "Good to the core", as my dear old grandma used to
say.
So yeah, I guess I might sound a bit preachy, but I do like to think
my "preaching" is mostly on the side of Good. And after all these
years, I can assure everyone that I most likely will not change my
style.
At least others can simply tune me out, but I'm stuck with me.
Carl Jarvis
On 5/11/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
I don't disagree with your ideas, but I think that I'm responding to my
feeling that you sound like a preacher or someone leading an AA meeting.
(smile)
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 8:39 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: WV Primary
Good Wednesday Evening, Miriam. And good evening to any others following
this discussion.
Sure, at one level we 99% are being victimized. But simply saying that we
are victims is not going to move anthills much less mountains.
How is it that so many average, hard working, conscientious, law abiding
Americans have come to be victims?
If we don't like talking about who is responsible, at least let's talk
about
how we begin a process to take control of our lives and of our nation's
resources. It's been many years since I decided that I was not going to be
a victim. Certainly this has not made a big difference in my material
success. But then I no longer measure my success by material stuff. It's
hard to be a victim if we don't play their game. When we get together and
decide that even though we are different looking, speak differently, and
have different sorts of Faith, we are more similar than dissimilar. We can
learn together that we do not need to support the posh life style of the
Super Rich.
We do not need to base our happiness on wealth. We can learn to say that
we
are not able to carry the load alone, but need the help of our neighbors.
We need to learn to trust one another. We need to sit and listen to just
who our neighbors are. We need to respect one another for our differences,
and we need to begin practicing today, right now.
Start by saying, "I am not a victim! I do need help to pull myself up by my
bootstraps. I am ready to accept my neighbors as my equals, embracing them
for their differences as well as for their similarities. I will listen
with
an open mind, and speak with an honest tongue."
Remember, practice makes perfect.
Carl Jarvis
On 5/11/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,more.
My response is, Don't blame the victim. We, the average Americans,
whatever name you wish to give us, working class, middle classs, the
common people, the silent majority, we are victimized by power and the
wealthy. I just posted an email about what I'd just learned today, May
11, 2016, about something Bill Clinton did, or tried to do, during his
Presidency. I wasn't a disinterested or an irresponsible citizen in
the 90's. I was very busy and my access to information plus the time I
had to delve deeply into political matters, was limited. We do not
have ourselves to blame. We have no idea of the manipulations that are
used in order to limit and control the information we have about how
our government works, about how our media work, about what our laws
actually say. Have you attempted to read a legal document recently? We
are purposefully kept ignorant. As our bureaucratic systems have
become all encompassing and more complex, we have less and less
control over our lives. Because each of us is unique, some of us are
more curious or less passive and accepting, and we, therefore, question
Butbe screwed.
please don't say, If only we were more alert or better in some way,
these terrible things wouldn't be happening. It is not our fault. We
are the victims, not the perpetrators.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 10:51 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Virginia Jarvis
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: WV Primary
Roger writes that in West Virginia, some sources contend that,
"forty-four percent of the Sanders voters intend to vote for Donald
Trump in November if the Democrat Nominee is Clinton". That's pretty
consistent with what I'm hearing from other sources. People who feel
disenfranchised, ignored and used strike out at what they perceive to
be the cause of their oppression.
So, if Bernie Sanders can't give them relief, maybe Donald Trump can.
Many observers blame the Mass Media for fanning confusion and mistrust
among the Working Class. But we have only ourselves to blame. If we
are so brain dead that we don't realize that Corporate America uses
Their Mass Media to promote their interests, we have earned the right to
Sure, it's easy to go with the flow, and hard work to swim against theDemocrat Nominee is Clinton.
stream. But isn't it odd that we are taught that it takes hard work
and persistence to "get ahead" in the world, but to disconnect when it
comes to politics. Our lives are filled with distractions and we
spend more thought and time on who we think will win the World Series
or become America's next Idol than we do on exploring the record of
those candidates begging for our vote.
So long as we are feeling just fine being Consumers rather than First
Class Citizens, we will continue to work and serve at the pleasure of
the Corporate Ruling Class.
Very frankly, if we are voting for Bernie Sanders, expecting him to
bring about a political revolution, we will be sorely disappointed.
Of course the Democratic Party's leadership will not allow that to
happen.
But if, just if, Bernie Sanders got the nod, the nation would go on
just as it has been going. The government will continue serving the
people it serves, because that is what they're paid to do.
No, real change, the kind that will put a new roof over the dream
houses of Working Class Americans, the kind that will give a job to
everyone seeking employment, the kind that will provide wages on which
Working Class families can live, that kind of revolution will happen
only from the ground up.
That
sort of new world will come about when we Working Class Citizens turn
off the constant pounding by the Empire's mass media, and begin to
build a Community, listening to one another, questioning why things
are the way they are, wondering how we came to put Profit before
People? Why do we think it's proper to measure success by our
material possessions, rather than by our Human Compassion? Why do we
hate our Masters, but then turn around and lust after their life
style? How do we begin to create a World of Peace?
First we must begin opening our ears, eyes and minds to those about us.
Understanding is the beginning of Peace.
Carl Jarvis
On 5/11/16, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I wanted to make this post last night just before I went to bed, but
a thunderstorm kept me off the computer. So I decided to do it first
thing in the morning. I have seen no news this morning, so this is
based on the eleven o'clock news last night. It appears that Sanders
beat Clinton in West Virginia with fifty-three percent to Clinton's
forty-one percent. There was no mention of Keith Judd or Martin
O'Malley, but after adding up the other percentages I suppose they
split less than one percent between them. Candidates who have already
dropped out and candidates who do not campaign or take any positions
on any issues usually get a low percentage, but this is unusually low.
They usually get at least between one and two percent. Keith Judd
seems to have suffered a precipitous decline since 2012 when he got
forty-eight percent of the vote against the only other candidate on
the ballot, Barack Obama. Anyway, I said it would be interesting to
see how candidates who did not campaign or take any positions would
do since Sanders poll numbers had declined so much since last month.
One of them did do rather well. There is a lawyer from Huntington
West Virginia who put his name on the ballot. The filing fee in this
state is two thousand dollars, so I suppose he just had a couple of
thousand dollars lying around to throw away. When he filed he said
that he did not expect to win; he just wanted to give West Virginians
a choice. In other words, his candidacy was just a lark. I keep
forgetting his name. I think it is Howard something. Well, he got six
percent. That is unusually high for a lark candidate. I suppose that
represents the anti-Clinton/anti-Sanders vote. Even so, Sanders did
much better than the latest polls before the election predicted that
he would. He also did much worse than the polls indicated that he
would do as of last month. I still maintain, though, that his win in
West Virginia was not because of a pro-Sanders vote, but, rather,
because of an anti-Clinton vote. I heard another poll figure last
night that backs that up. It seems that forty-four percent of the
Sanders voters intend to vote for Donald Trump in November if the
