[Vision2020] Bill's Quill and Rosemary's Thyme

[rodney johnson]

Believe it or not, I am actually going to follow through with two particular 
resolutions for the New Year: not to waste time, and to speak more plainly.  
(Translated: this is absolutely my last hurrah on Vision 2020.)  And, once 
again, I am in no way connected or related (biologically, logistically, or 
denominationally -- though I'm still up for grabs demographically and 
ontologically) to the alleged Axis of Evil that is the topic of discussion 
everyday, in every way, on this forum.  So please do not blame them or hold 
them accountable for anything I write.

Bill London must have herniated himself in his stre-eeetched analysis of the 
present situation with the Hewlett Packard case from the 9th Circuit.  There 
is a gigantic difference, though, between this apple and that orange that is 
so glaringly obvious that Tom Hansen should have been the only one who 
failed to recognize it.  Hewlett Packard is a private corporation.  Hewlett 
Packard is not the U.S. government, nor is there a State of Hewlett Packard, 
nor a City of HP.  Hewlett Packard does not have any obligations under the 
First Amendment of the Constitution; the federal, state, and local 
governments, on the other hand, have ALL the obligations under the 
First--and later by incorporation, Fourteenth--Amendments.  The only laws 
that Hewlett Packard can pass are by-laws.

So, Bill, go ahead, as you suggested in your recent posting, and push for 
the Moscow City Council to officially censure Doug Wilson, Christ Church, 
New St. Andrews, etc.  It should be an easy deal.  After all, three of the 
city councilmembers are basically your MCA plants (remember how it all 
started, sitting around in YOUR kitchen).  John, Nancy, and Linda ought to 
grab the ball and run with it, legal advice to the contrary.  The delegates 
to the Constitutional Convention were unaware of the double entendre when 
they thankfully decided against BILL's of Attainder.

It's not just the Constitution that limits what government can do to private 
individuals and organizations.  Civil rights legislation is also a check on 
state action.  If there is one thing I have harped on consistently in this 
controversy, it is that certain actions taken by state actors (primarily the 
universities) were unlawful.  Yes, UNLAWFUL.  Some of you might have noticed 
how the ODHR's website was dramatically altered quite a ways into the 
controversy.  The website now has a definitely more neutral tone in how it 
disseminates information, and has even underlined a few important words in 
the President Michael's original release just to cover its butt.  They had 
to change their website to comply with the law.  Imagine that: a diversity 
office being slack in its compliance with civil rights laws!  My objections 
to what was going on had nothing to do with academic freedom and how 
half-rate professors quietly correct their spelling errors, but everything 
to do with how administrative officials actually deal with Diversity the 
Reality, not Diversity the Myth.

My advice, though I have never had occasion to give it (and they should take 
it with great caution since, after all, my law degree is from the U of I), 
for Christ Church congregants who attend the University would be to actually 
exercise their rights under the laws of the land, and especially under the 
University's own regulations.  Start filing the harassment complaints when 
you experience harassment, especially the institutional kind.  Make ODHR 
actually follow through with its job description.  But good luck in honestly 
expecting any impartial application of these regulations and the 
University's own "respectful climate"-sponsoring policies!  What I call 
harassment, they call protest.  You say to-MEI-to, I say to-MA-to.  After 
all, didn't the President himself officially declare these to be bad and 
repugnant folks...?  Aren’t they a hate group, and it's okay to hate 
hate-groups...?  I find it frightfully amusing that at least two of the 
signers of these now-famous statements (and at least one partial retraction 
from WSU) are Mormons.  Bill, why don't you start quizzing President Rawlins 
and Provost Pitcher about their church's "antigay" views, not to mention the 
historical (sic?) LDS stance on the black race, slavery, and the 
Confederacy?  (After all, the 1970s are not ancient history.)  Pull your 
strings with the City Council marionettes so they take action to show that 
these people are not part of our community.  But that would be too 
consistent, wouldn't it; and it wouldn't accomplish your real objective, now 
would it?

Bill, you have some serious control issues.  You are Moscow's self-appointed 
busybody.  Your "open letters" from the Town Crybaby are about as open as 
Rosemary's driveway this year.  (All I can hum lately is, "Let it snow, let 
it snow, let it snow...")  It's either your way or the highway.  When public 
officials (and even private individuals) don't lay prostrate in your 
presence, you mete out public retribution with your poison pen.  Of course, 
you fashion yourself as just practicing good government, being a Ralph 
Nader-lite, a conscientious and high-minded Public Citizen.  Nonsense!  
You're nothing but a boisterous and self-inflated Public Nuisance.  As Joan 
Opyr would say, "You're not the boss of me" (or something like that).  Bill, 
you are not the boss of me, your are not the boss of Moscow, and you are not 
the boss of a number of citizens who don't like your idea of what you call 
"OUR community."

Oh boy, this plainspeaking stuff is really starting to feel good!  Thanks, 
Rosemary, for setting the example of how we Quakers can speak truth to 
power, how we can pull no punches with our plain speech, how we can be 
insultingly egalitarian to university officials and professors, city 
councilmembers, and even Bill London.  And to top it off, we can even 
justify it with our religion.  How to Tell the Pharisees Off, In Ten Easy 
Steps.

(Here I should pause to make a note to Tom Hansen, for whom there is no 
shade of gray and ne'er reading material between the lines: I have been 
trying to make a point.)

By the way, Rose, nice try with the "my main purpose in this Inquisition is 
not Greg Dickison."  Come on, we are not that stupid.  Oh, sure, you were 
just taking a comprehensive look at how Latah County could save money, cut 
excess expenditures and while you were doing your across-the-board 
numbers-crunching snow-bound homework, you just happened to stumble across 
the PD contracts.  Naw, that dog won't bark.  It's time for some really 
plain speaking.  Why don't you just drop the façade and come out and say it. 
  You hate Greg Dickison, don't you?  And Doug Wilson?  And all the rest of 
them?  Just be honest and speak plainly and repeat the admission: "I HATE 
THEM!"

Speaking of hate on a more serious note, I think of the term "love"-- an 
elusive term, more than a concept, something that can never really truly be 
described except experientially.  How does the old saying go?  "How will I 
know I'm in love?" asks Innocence.  "You'll know it when you know it," says 
Experience.  "You'll just know it."  Anyway, you get the picture.  Like 
love, "hate" is also an elusive term, something that one can't really put 
the finger on easily until it is readily seen, read, heard, felt, and known 
and recognized for what it is.  Which brings me to Vision 2020.  There is 
ample hate circulated daily on this forum.  It is palpable, very palpable; 
and, ironically, it is usually manifested in the name of "fighting hate."  
And, of course, it is primarily directed at the usual gang: Doug Wilson 
("The Most Hated Man in Moscow"), Christ Church, New St. Andrews, etc.  Most 
of the hate preceded the slavery debate of a few months ago; but with the 
"Neo-confederate" twist, the hate just found a focal point that some would 
say even legitimizes it.  In other words, hate is bad, but it's now okay to 
hate those guys.  For the SPLC tells me so.

Look through the Vision 2020 archives if you don't believe me.  Try to find 
a kind word spoken by DonaldH675.  It's nothing but nastiness, bitterness, 
spite--in short, hate.  It's ugly.  No allegation is too outlandish to make, 
no inference is too slanderous to draw, and no rumor is too depraved to 
entertain.  All of this has the tinge of madness.  Rosemary is obsessed to 
the point that she's absolutely consumed with hate and can't get rid of it.  
It erupts forth and infects us all, like a deadly flu bug.  It causes her to 
spend an inordinate amount of time each day stewing and reviewing in her 
mind all the bad thoughts she has about certain people.  Her emails make 
that clear.  It makes her do crazy things like going off on the recent 
tangent of marshalling the like-minded troops in a fit to storm the 
commissioners' office.  Anything to get Greg Dickison.  Anything to go after 
anybody from Christ Church.  Like it or not, Christ Church has now become 
Rose's life, her permanent source of a very uninspiring "inspiration," and 
she can't let go even if she were to try.

It's not healthy, and I want to be as far away as possible from this daily 
dose of vitriol.

- Rod Johnson

(Canceling my prescription for 20/20 Vision, I'd rather be in the dark.)

_________________________________________________________________
Get a FREE online virus check for your PC here, from McAfee. 
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963