[Vision2020] Crusaders vs. Infidels: Moscow's Muscular Christianity
keim153 at gmail.com
Wed Dec 1 18:08:37 PST 2010
We’ll have to agree to disagree on this, Sunil. Run off is a strong
term, but it is the closest I can come to what seemed to be happening
at the time. While some, such as D. Wilson almost seemed to enjoy
stirring up V2020 and deserved to be questioned, others seemed to be
gone after simply because they were CC members. Perhaps this didn’t
specifically happen on the listserv—enough happened on both the
listserv and in town that I can’t recall what happened where—CC
members were uncomfortable enough that they are no longer a part of
the community conversation that v2020 was originally designed to aid.
While I don't necessarily agree with them, I think they have a right
to be a part of the conversation.
I remember when this issue was new and hot: vandalism, name calling,
pickets, lists of businesses not to patronize. I felt both sides went
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:53 AM, Sunil Ramalingam <
sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think anyone was run off V2020. People chose to leave, for whatever
> reason. One didn't want to answer questions about things he had said here
> and in the papers. But they weren't run off.
> Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 00:17:15 -0800
> From: keim153 at gmail.com
> To: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Crusaders vs. Infidels: Moscow's Muscular
> I was going to leave you alone, as you requested. But since you asked to
> restart our correspondence...
> Hey V2020 posters:
> Lots of good stuff below if you like watching Joe and I banter back and
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>wrote:
> In all honesty I'm having some trouble understanding your point, Darrell. I
> fear you won't clarify it further but I'll ask some questions in the hope
> that you really do have a point to make.
> I'll try. I thought I was fairly clear. I'm not surprised you are having
> trouble, we don't seem to communicate well with one another.
> You call the NSA post a "new advertising campaign" but complain about the
> recent NSA criticism on Vision 2020 because it is "rehashing the old" so it
> "doesn't seem to be of benefit." But how can it be rehashing the "old" if it
> is criticism of the "new" ad campaign? The ad campaign was just posted, so
> criticism of it is "new," right? (I've actually made this point already.)
> Yeah, it's a new campaign. But has the product they are attempting to sell
> changed in any way? No. SSDD. That's Same Stuff, Different Day. They are
> still ultra-conservative christians with some views that many consider odd
> and/or offensive. It is simply a new campaign selling the same ultra
> conservative dogma as they have always sold. I doubt if it will change
> anyones position or deepen their understanding of them.
> And, to clarify my position I did not complain about NSA criticism on
> V2020. I complained about the amount of NSA criticism on v2020. Too recap:
> I initially complained about how often things, such as the church list Tom
> posted, get linked back to CC. When you pressed in a later note I
> elaborated that unless we had new info or something changed, it seems like
> most of the key players already know where they stand. Thus, my belief that
> further discussion doesn't seem to be of benefit. That was the point where
> you made at least 5 erroneous assertions about me. Assertions which were
> downright silly, considering how little you know about me. Assertions,
> which I'll remind you, you never deigned to address. Even after I was kind
> enough to enumerate them for you, and request clarification. I digress.
> Sorry about that.
> I have no problem with NSA criticism, or praise for that matter, on V2020.
> I just wish the topic didn't have to come up with such frequency. Moscow
> has other things of interest to discuss. What about the schools? U of I?
> Downtown? URA? City Council? All of these together don't get half the
> bandwidth CC does. Here is our Mission Statement. Perhaps it should be
> posted periodically, so that people might read it. It is one of the reasons
> I initially signed on to V2020.
> Vision 2020 Mission Statement Adopted March 1995
> 1. To ensure that all parts of our community have an opportunity to
> take part in visualizing and planning for the community's future.
> 2. To strengthen citizens' sense of community by promoting awareness,
> ownership and investment in Moscow's future.
> 3. To foster cooperation among (and public involvement with) the
> agencies and organizations that plan for and make decisions about the future
> of Moscow and Latah County.
> 4. To raise awareness on the part of citizens and public officials
> 1. uncontrolled and unplanned growth may have negative effects.
> 2. short-term decisions have long-term consequences.
> 5. To inform ourselves about growth and development issues.
> 6. To have fun thinking critically and creatively.
> Does this much focus on one topic help us to achieve our mission? I
> submit that it does not.
> Is your point that NSA and Christ Church can insult secularists and Muslims
> and progressives and be free of public criticism, and use threatening
> rhetoric, because they've done it before? Is the use of threatening rhetoric
> in an NSA ad campaign "old news"?
> No. And if you honestly think the campaign is a legitimate physical
> threat--i.e. they are going to go out and physically assault people, well I
> think that is highly unlikely. You must also think that drinking Bud Light
> will get the Swedish Bikini Team after you, and that Exxon gas will put a
> real tiger in your tank. I kid. I think they are using outrageous
> advertising hyperbole to draw their target market--ultra conservative
> christians. Not a turn-on for me, but I'll bet it works well for the people
> they want.
> Yet isn't the NSA complaint about secularists "old news" for this very
> reason, just the same old stuff they've been saying? Did you contact Roy
> Atwood and complain to him about reporting "old news" in his "new" ad
> campaign? Or is there something special that the NSA and Christ Church
> criticisms have going for them that exempts them from the "only new
> criticisms" demand?
> Do they constantly post on Vision 2020 about the same thing over and over
> and over and over and over... ad infinitum? No, in fact they were pretty
> much run-off v2020 by folks that found them offensive (which would seem to
> violate points 1 AND 2 of our Mission Statement). And, while I have spoken
> with Roy Atwood and other key players at both CC and Logos on other topics,
> why would I speak to any of them about something they post on their
> webpages? It is their space, they can write what they wish; whether you or
> I like it or not.
> Maybe the V is special since it is a public venue. Then in that case,
> you'll be sure to make the same complaint when Crabtree or Roger or whomever
> accuses liberals and progressives of being socialists, or in favor of gun
> control, or any number of charges that they keep making over and over again.
> Same "old news" and there is no place on the V for "old news" since it
> "doesn't seem to be of benefit," right?
> If those issues came up with the same frequency as Christ Church, and no
> real change bringing in new info to discuss, I might.
> Or did I still miss the "nuance" yet again?
> Yeah, you probably did. But that's okay with me. I'm happy to answer
> questions for you. Perhaps you'll answer some of the questions I've already
> asked you sometime..
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Vision2020