I don't think I was ever apolitical. I remember watching the Keyfauver
senate hearings on TV when I was 13 years old. I think they were
investigating organized crime. And Edward R. Murrow had a real honest to God
informative news reporting program on CBS TV back then. And I was into folk
music which was political because Pete Seeger, Woodie Guthrie, Leadbelly,
the Weavers, they were all singing political songs and involved with
Communists and former Communists.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2016 8:38 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Clinton's Transition Team: A Corporate
Presidency Foretold
56 years ago I was about as apolitical as you get. I don't think I had even
heard about god yet.
On 8/25/2016 10:05 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
If email existed 56 years ago, and if I had joined Blind Democracy,his sexual proclivities.
even though I had not yet become blind, you would have met a very
different man.
Newly married...for the first time, I was still working through my
Christian Experience, I talked a great deal about my "Black" friends,
my views on women's rights were pretty much in line with the teachings
of the day, and you don't even want to know how Homophobic I was.
Despite believing myself to be a Liberal...as defined in that long
forgotten day, and despite my belief that my roots were deep in the
Working Class, and I was on my way toward becoming Middle Class,
despite how wonderful I thought I was, I'd not vote for that man for
Dog Catcher, today.
But fortunately we all have the choice to change. Based on Life's
Experiences we become "born again" many times over. That is, if we
allow ourselves to do so.
Today I think I'd make a pretty good Dog Catcher, and I'd never care
one whit about the dog's color or sexual orientation.
So I base the fact that I cannot vote for Clinton, based on the face
she presents to me. Yes, she is a mix of positives and negatives, but
her involvement in a government that is murdering innocent people
around the globe, even at home, speaks far too loudly for me to
ignore. Once in office, Hillary Clinton could change. She will have
the opportunities to do so. And if she does prove that she is a new
woman...a better leader than Barak Obama or Bill Clinton, then I would
decide to vote for her based on this new track record.
For better or for worse, I am not the same person I was in 1965, and I
would not want to have my views and actions of that day dragged out
and waved in front of the world of today. Of course, who I am today,
a work in progress, is based on all of the experiences and emotional
struggles I experienced back then, so I do not pretend they never
existed, even though it is no longer me.
And finally, if I'm around in another 20 years(101), I hope that I am
looking at a changed person. I never want to be cast in stone. If
that were the case, and my life became unchanging, I'd be better off
under the stone.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/24/16, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I am reminded of my stepmother. It has been quite a few years now
since I last spoke to her, but the last time I did she, for some
reason, went on and on about how she accepts the fact that one of her
three sons, my stepbrother, is gay. It seems to me that if she
accepts it so well she would not make such a big deal of how well she
accepts it without anyone else even having mentioned it. Personally,
except to make this point right now, I never see the need to even mention
rule.It has been quite a while since I have spoken to him too, but I have
several times since I last spoke to my stepmother and his sexual
orientation did not even come up. And it certainly isn't like he
doesn't know that I know.
On 8/24/2016 11:46 AM, Alice Dampman Humel wrote:
Just because Trump's son in law is an Orthodox Jew and his daughter
converted doesn't mean that Trump is not an anti-Semite. How many
times do we see it that a racist will accept his son's black wife,
but still retains his prejudices and bigotry about other black
people, a homophobe will accept her daughter's girlfriend but
otherwise remain a homophobe.
People often circle the wagons when it comes to their own children
or other family members, but it does not change their bigotry, it
makes an exception for their own, and it's the exception that proves the
margin?I knew a woman, old, elder, whatever you want to call it, who was as
white bread as they come, and when one of her children or
grandchildren, I forget which married an African American, the woman
could never speak about him without adding, "He's the nicest person
you'd ever want to meet."
Now what does that tell you, that she had to inform you that this
black man was a nice person? Would she have done the same for a
white guy? She never added that phrase when talking about the
spouses of her other progeny...
And, anyway, there's something extra creepy about Donald's
interactions with Ivanka...On Aug 23, 2016, at 1:18 PM, Miriam Vieni
<miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Bob,
In response to your last point, I think that people of color voted
for Clinton because they were misinformed by the mass media and by
their own leaders who are bought off by the Democratic Party
establishment. How many of them, for example, know that the board
of the Congressional Black Caucus is made up largely of CEO's of
corporations, not black congressional representatives? Remember
that when Obama first started campaigning for the Presidency, all
of the black establishment leaders were supporting Hillary.
People are not given facts. Remember Trump's supposedly anti
semitic tweet?
How many people know that he has an Orthodox Jewish son-in-law and
that his daughter, so active in his campaign, converted to Judaism
when she married?
My point is that everything that is said and done in campaigns is
for public consumption and is completely unrelated to reality.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bob ;
Hachey
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2016 11:51 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Clinton's Transition Team: A
Corporate Presidency Foretold
Hi Charlie,
Firstly, glad you got to have that good experience in Colorado. I
recently attended the wedding of my sinster-in-law to a great guy
and it was wonderful.
Secondly, I agree completely with you that a President Trump is
unthinkable.
But I cant bring myself to say that Clinton is good, just a good
bit less bad.
Frankly, I believe that, in many ways, we have been regressing as a
society since the election of Ronald Reagan and some of that
regression has taken place under Clinton and even under Obama.
IT sickens me to the core to see corporatist Democrats like the
Clintons and John Kerry continually coddling our wealthiest
citizens. Yes, they sometimes talk a good game, but when the rubber
meets the road, they always seem to not go far enough.
It is surely not all their fault as the Republicans seem to be
better at negative campaigning and boy am I disgusted by how well
negative campaigning seems to work in this so-called civilized
society.
Bottom line here. What does it say about our society when Hillary
Clinton seems to be the best we can do?
One more point here. How do we explain the fact that members of
minority populations chose Clinton over Sanders by a rather wide
Frankly, I
believe that they were not voting in favor of their best econbomic
interests.
Bob Hachey
