[Vision2020] child forced back/was Romney drops out!?
Tom Hansen
thansen at moscow.com
Sat Feb 9 14:01:53 PST 2008
Sue -
I believe that you re referencing the "Idaho Open Meeting Law" (attached).
Due to this past month, placing the words "Idaho" and "Sunshine" in the same
sentence can no longer be justified without having to answer the question,
"Huh?"
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
"Some people in Moscow seem to have forgotten the purpose of a
representative government."
- April Coggins (February 7, 2008)
_____
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Sue Hovey
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 1:40 PM
To: Sunil Ramalingam; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] child forced back/was Romney drops out!?
Inasmuch as I continue to support Hillary Clinton for President for reasons
that may not appeal to anyone's political logic but mine, and because I was
so vehement over the Gerry Weitz attempt to refashion the world in his
image, I have tried to tone it down a bit and be much more my lovable
non-contentious self; however, I find I must agree with Sunil on this one.
Had it been any other child in any other circumstance the right wing zealots
who champion "the father as head of the family" world view would have been
right there with the police to be sure he was returned to his rightful
owner.
I also believe a more visable role for Bill Clinton in Gore's campaign
just might have been enough to keep the Rs from stealing that election. I
think Gore was hurt, not helped, by his refusal to involve Clinton.
One question, too: Doesn't the Idaho sunshine law cover city council
actions? If so, how could they legally vote in a closed session to sign a
contract with Hawkins?
Sue H.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sunil <mailto:sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> Ramalingam
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2008 9:47 AM
Subject: [Vision2020] child forced back/was Romney drops out!?
I know I'm sidetracking...
I agree that returning a child to his father may have caused political
problems for Gore had he accepted help from Bill Clinton in 2000. But I do
disagree that 'they forced that Cuban child back to Castro.'
They returned a child to his father after his mother's death. A child
should be with his or her natural parents unless there's a showing that the
parents are unfit. There was no such showing in the Gonzalez case. Instead
we had politics sticking its ugly head into family business, just as we
later saw in the Terry Schiavo case.
Extended family, wherever they're located, don't get to grab someone else's
child unless the parent/s are unfit. We wouldn't allow the Beverly Hills
relatives to grab a Moscow/Potlatch/Deary child from a parent just because
the relatives had a big house with a cement pond.
Sunil
_____
Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 19:04:17 -0800
From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
To: sdredge at yahoo.com; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Romney drops out!?
Scott,
In 2000 Bill Clinton had a 42% approval rating. Campaigning with Clinton in
2000 would have been a kiss of death. He had an even lower rating in Florida
because they forced that Cuban child back to Castro.
Yes, Gore lost the election because Florida's Secretary of State, Kathleen
Harris, certified the wrong set of popular votes giving the electoral votes
to Bush instead of Gore. Also, Nader split the Democratic vote in Vermont,
giving the state to Bush. Gore didn't lose the election in 2000, it was
stolen from him, and Nader made it possible. Nader doesn't have issues he is
concerned with, he is only concerned about himself. The environment has been
demolished and set back decades because Bush was allowed into office.
Best Regards,
Donovan
Scott Dredge <sdredge at yahoo.com> wrote:
It's a stretch to suggest that Nader sabotaged the 2000 election. The
reason Al Gore lost was because of Al Gore himself. Under the categories of
coulda, woulda, shoulda, Gore coulda had Bill Clinton campaigning for him
instead of distancing himself from Clinton. And Bill Clinton knows how to
run a successful campaign.
I'd like to see a Clinton/Obama ticket running against a McCain/anybody
ticket. Also, it doesn't particularly matter much to me which ticket wins,
I'm just looking forward to the regime change even though George W. Bush is
basically neutered at this stage.
-Scott
----- Original Message ----
From: Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com>
To: Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net>
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Sent: Friday, February 8, 2008 1:36:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Romney drops out!?
On 2/8/08, Garrett Clevenger <garrettmc at verizon.net> wrote:
Edwards would be good, as I like what he says, but my
preference would be Ralph Nader, who may very well
campaign for President. Appealing to Progressives is
good with me, despite whatever baggage Nader may have
(and really, who doesn't have baggage?)
Nader has a record of working on changing America for
the better for 40 years. He is well connected to the
activist community, and engaging activists is key to
changing our country from it's disastrous course. An
Obama/Nader ticket sounds sweet to me.
gclev
Many progressives begged Nader to drop out of the 2000 presidential race,
due to the potential of splitting the Democratic vote harming Gore's
chances. We all know the result. Nader helped put Bush in the White House
in 2000. Nader's Florida votes alone gave Florida's electoral votes to
Bush, as the vote count actually was counted, though we also know that
absent illegal voter disenfranchisement, deliberately pushed by Florida's
Secretary of State and Bush supporter Katherine Harris, Gore would have won
Florida, even with Nader's participation.
Republican operatives were running ads supporting Nader's 2000 candidacy,
knowing this would hurt Gore. And Nader knew this.
Nader even argued that a Bush presidency might be good for the nation in the
long run, given that Bush would create such a back lash against his policies
that progressives in the long run would become more unified and motivated.
But as far as I am concerned, given the damage of the Bush administration,
Nader's 2000 presidential run was an irresponsible application of idealistic
principles over sensible practical politics, resulting in wounds that may
not heal for decades. The pending US Supreme Court nominations in 2000
alone were enough of a reason for Nader to withdraw to allow Gore the best
chance of a win. Nader and everyone knew there was zero chance of Nader
taking the White House. His presidential run did not even result in a
stronger party base supporting Nader or those who support his policies. His
supporters are more off the radar now than in 2000.
I recall hearing from Nader supporters in 2000 how Gore and Bush both
represented corporate big money, and entrenched elitist Washington power,
and were not that different. Well, we have seen that however much this was
true, there were substantial differences between Gore and Bush that would
have taken the USA in very different directions on critical issues, the
invasion of Iraq and climate change, for example. I do not believe Gore
would have supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq, and he would have
began to address climate change while the Bush administration was in denial,
backing big oil and energy interests, who did not want to address climate
change for obvious financial reasons.
Nader would be a terrible choice for a VP candidate under Obama. I lost
respect for him as a politician after his sabotage of the 2000 presidential
election. This showed he is not willing to compromise when the overall good
of the nation is at stake.
Ted Moffett
-----Inline Attachment Follows-----
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net <http://www.fsr.net/>
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
_____
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=51438/*http:/www.yahoo.com/r/hs>
_____
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080209/e20d55d3/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: openmeeting.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 277094 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20080209/e20d55d3/attachment-0001.pdf
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list