[Vision2020] Question, V-Peeps . . .
Paul Rumelhart
godshatter at yahoo.com
Sun Mar 25 23:47:13 PDT 2012
Seriously? Get some perspective, please.
Paul
On 03/25/2012 07:35 PM, Art Deco wrote:
> Rumelhart writes:
>
> "To me, the obviously right thing to do is to stop fighting them and
> to welcome them with open arms,"
>
> Just like the Jews should have welcomed the Nazis?
>
> Delusional.
>
> w.
>
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 6:39 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com
> <mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com>> wrote:
>
> On 03/25/2012 03:34 PM, Saundra Lund wrote:
>>
>> Paul wrote:
>>
>> “I don't particularly care what views a person holds about
>> antebellum slavery”
>>
>> Bully for you. Personally, I believe that revisionist history
>> whitewashing the real horror of antebellum slavery is not only
>> wrong, but it’s also incredibly offensive, disrespectful, and
>> morally indefensible for self-professing Christians. I subscribe
>> to the maxim that those who don’t remember history are bound to
>> repeat it.
>>
>
> Great. I'm not trying to get you to agree with the Kirk, I'm
> trying to get you to be tolerant of the fact that they believe
> things that you think are utter garbage.
>
>
>> Paul also wrote:
>>
>> “If the Intoleristas had instead been of the frame of mind of
>> "sorry, we're not going to let you turn the Palouse into a
>> theocracy, but we're still happy to have you as part of our
>> community", then they might not have been so quick to accuse some
>> of you of vandalism”
>>
>> There ya go again with your revisionism. The fact of the matter
>> is that’s exactly what happened for years and years, and you can
>> see where that got us. Christ Church became bolder & bolder
>> about flouting the law and bolder in their local attacks against
>> all who disagreed with them. For instance, Wilson et al were
>> beyond livid that two UI historians wrote a book review refuting
>> the nonsense in Wilson’s & Wilkin’s heavily plagiarized
>> monograph, “Southern Slavery As It Was,” and went whining all the
>> way to the governor not threatening the UI (you know the kind of
>> non-threat: the same game they’ve played at least twice in
>> trying to get V2020 shut down, filing completely bogus zoning
>> complaints against the UI, the “Topless & Proud” stunt using
>> stolen UI resources – they still think that was the best prank
>> ever, etc.), demanding “discipline” (presumably not the way they
>> allow schools to physically discipline students) for the two
>> profs for – gasp – actually doing their jobs & so forth.
>>
>> Since your memory is . . . curiously selective, how about
>> checking out:
>>
>> http://hnn.us/articles/9142.html
>>
>> This is the perspective of one of the “Intolerista” professors
>> Wilson & his minions demanded be disciplined. Note: Ramsey
>> certainly didn’t consider himself an “Intolerista,” but that’s
>> the label Wilson painted him with simply for daring to disagree
>> with Wilson’s & Wilkin’s revisionist history by writing a
>> scholarly critique of SSAIW. That’s the Kirk’s idea of “working
>> together.”
>>
>
> First of all, my memory is not selective. I'm not trying to
> choose a winner in this fight of yours, I'm hoping that "you
> guys", the liberal crowd in this town that I used to have so much
> respect for, take back the upper ground and at least try to bridge
> this gap. I realize that some of the Christ Church members have
> not played nice all the time. It takes two to tango, is all I'm
> saying.
>
>
>> Paul, I had been concerned that you appear to post to V2020
>> during UI working hours. Another favorite tactic used by the
>> Kirk to “discipline” dissenters is to “go after” UI & WSU
>> employees in attempts to get them fired for doing things like
>> posting to V2020 during working hours . . . and sometimes, for
>> what they do in their personal hours (i.e., Prof. Dale Graden
>> having the nerve to write a letter to the editor). As a staff
>> person, you are a much easier target than are professors.
>>
>
> I thank you for your concern. I will be more careful in the
> future. I usually only post quick simple posts when I happen to
> be checking my personal email at work.
>
>
>> I quit worrying, though, because since you only selectively
>> “care” about the Constitutional freedoms that are the basis of
>> this country, you relish attacking those of us (“you people”) who
>> vocally disagree with attempts to use laws to wage culture wars
>> against all who don’t share their particular flavor of
>> Christianity. They won’t go after you because you have never
>> offered any substantive criticism of their antics.
>>
>
> Your right, I don't care about Constitutional freedoms. When have
> I ever posted about that stupid piece of paper and it's so-called
> "freedoms"? I suppose it's my complete lack of compassion and
> empathy for others that's to blame.
>
>
>> *You are, in fact, intolerant of our beliefs and freely toss
>> around inaccurate and dishonest stereotypes & imaginary events
>> about those opposed to any flavor theocracy why while trying to
>> convince us that you are some kind of “Tolerance” poster boy.*
>>
>> Not even close, and definitely no cigar for you J
>>
>
> Let me get this straight. You're calling me out for being
> intolerant of your intolerance. I really don't know what to say
> to that.
>
>
>> In another post, you wrote:
>>
>> “They coined the term, you all chose to use it as a badge of
>> honor, and you're surprised they refer to you by that name?”
>>
>> Huh – is that your attitude about Traynor Martin being targeted
>> because he wore a hoody in the “wrong” neighborhood? Or about
>> Shaima Alawadi being targeted because she was an Iraqi woman in
>> American who wore a hajib? Sounds pretty close to blaming the
>> victims to me.
>>
>
> So, what's the connection between the death of Trayvon Martin and
> some Christ Church members using the term "intolerista" as a
> pejorative? You have claimed the term as your own. It only makes
> sense that they would use that term when referring to you.
>
>
>> You don’t like the fact that some of Wilson’s targets took his
>> pejorative and accurately & appropriately redefined it – too bad
>> for you, and too bad for Wilson. I know he & his ilk were
>> desperately hoping his neologism would catch on and become
>> another weapon for his culture war. It didn’t *because* those of
>> us he targeted had the mother with to take the wind out of his
>> sail – even Wikipedia booted the word & original definition out
>> J You *weren’t* the target, so I really don’t give a rip that
>> you don’t like that some have claimed the weapon wielded against
>> them.
>>
>
> What I don't like is when you use the term as a rallying cry
> against another group in this community. I don't like the fight
> that has been going on in this community, and I'm working with the
> people I most identify with to see if I can get anyone interested
> in stopping it. So far, I've had zero luck. If I were a Christ
> Churcher, I would be trying to convince them to stop doing the
> things they do to widen this divide.
>
>
>> One other thing . . . in a more recent post, you wrote:
>>
>> “When you actually converse with someone from Christ Church on
>> these topics, you can often-times see where they are coming
>> from. You might not agree, but you can see where they are coming
>> from based on their specific world view.”
>>
>> Oh, get over yourself, Paul! You seem to think you are the
>> *only* one to have done so, and you couldn’t be more wrong.
>> Nick, Keely, Rose, and I here as well as others not here have
>> *all *engaged in extensive discussion with Wilson and his
>> followers over the years and had cordial relationships with some,
>> not-so-cordial with others (i.e., I take offense at being told by
>> one of Wilson’s head minions that God had deafened & blinded me).
>>
>> But, intelligent people can’t get away from the fact that what
>> they want is a theocracy so that the teeth of the law will force
>> those of us who disagree with their moral code to follow it or Be
>> Punished here on earth.
>>
>
> I doubt that they are the only group in town that would institute
> laws favorable to them if they had half a chance. I don't want a
> theocracy any more than you do, but I don't fault them for wanting
> one. They think their God demands it, or that they would have a
> chance at saving people from eternal torment if they could get
> that put in place. Luckily for me, there is a political process
> that they have to go through, and a Constitution that expressly
> forbids much of what they would propose.
>
>> Just as I have no interest in “hanging” with racist Kluckers or
>> the anti-choice crowd that advocates violence or the anti-gay
>> crowd that wants death for gays or the anti-women crowd who
>> thinks women belong barefoot & chained to the stove with the
>> chain only long enough to reach the bedroom, I have no interest
>> in “hanging” with those who want nothing more here on earth than
>> theocracy and “forced salvation” for “Believers” and
>> “unbelievers” alike.
>>
>
> Aside from the groups that actively promote violence, I would have
> no problem hanging out with a group whose beliefs or ideals I
> disagree with. I don't see this as a bad thing. I'd hate it if
> everyone in the world though the exact same way I did.
>
>
>> Does that mean I wouldn’t shove someone – anyone -- out of the
>> way of a bus, or not turn my garden hose on their house fire, or
>> drive past someone with car trouble?
>>
>> Of course not, no matter how much you desperately want to
>> convince people otherwise.
>>
>
> I am not surprised at all that you would help someone out whose
> ideals you disagree with. It's the fact that "you guys" are good
> people that really puzzles me in this. To me, the obviously right
> thing to do is to stop fighting them and to welcome them with open
> arms, despite your differences.
>
> Paul
>
>
>> Saundra
>>
>> *From:*Paul Rumelhart [mailto:godshatter at yahoo.com]
>> *Sent:* Sunday, March 25, 2012 11:07 AM
>> *To:* Tom Hansen
>> *Cc:* Saundra Lund; vision2020
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vision2020] Question, V-Peeps . . .
>>
>> This is a nice example of the intolerance I'm talking about. I
>> don't particularly care what views a person holds about
>> antebellum slavery, or who they think should be in charge of the
>> finances in their marriage. I'll still sit down and have a beer
>> with them.
>>
>> If the Intoleristas had instead been of the frame of mind of
>> "sorry, we're not going to let you turn the Palouse into a
>> theocracy, but we're still happy to have you as part of our
>> community", then they might not have been so quick to accuse some
>> of you of vandalism when they reported the incidents to the
>> police. Go out of your way to make yourself someone's enemy, and
>> they will think of you first when something like that happens to
>> them.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On 03/25/2012 04:37 AM, Tom Hansen wrote:
>>
>> */Intoleristas/*
>>
>> *(in tol er és ta), n.*
>>
>> * A person holding anti-slavery sentiments
>> * A committed feminist.
>> * A supporter of the Constitution, human rights, and equality
>> for all, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion,
>> economic status, or sexual orientation.
>> * A person with a wholesome proclivity for outing shifty
>> hypocrites, shameless liars, and sham historians.
>> * A person who is neither intimidated nor silenced by
>> right-wing, theocratic bullies, or their sycophantic toadies.
>> * A person who wears the title proudly as a reminder that
>> he/she is about the business of democracy.
>>
>> */"It is not so much what we are as much as what we are about."/*
>>
>> A flash from the past . . .
>>
>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/sounds/Intoleristas_020405.mp3
>>
>> Who can forget . . .
>>
>> http://www.notonthepalouse.com/documents/Crouch_LMT_071506.pdf
>>
>> Let the whine flow . . .
>>
>> http://www.notonthepalouse.com/Wilson_MPDcomplaint_071506.pdf
>>
>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/stuff/Dickison_RecReq.jpg
>>
>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/writofmandate
>>
>> ----------------------
>>
>> There is, literally, loads and loads more, Mr. Rumelhart . . .
>> like letters sent from the un-pastor to then-Governor Kempthorne
>> and then-UI President White . . . Doug "Charlie Brown" Wilson's
>> speech at the Public Civility Forum at the Hamilton Indoor
>> Recreation Center a few years ago . . . the Great Christ Church
>> Debate between the Un-Pastor and the Intoleristas' own Keely Mix
>> on KRFP. I could go on and on and on and . . .
>>
>> I'll jus' leevya with His Whineyness' own words . . .
>>
>> http://www.tomandrodna.com/protest/Doug_Wilson_Liers_013107.mp3
>>
>> Thanks for the promo, though.
>>
>> image.jpeg
>>
>> Seeya there, Moscow.
>>
>> Tom Hansen
>>
>> Wallace, Idaho
>>
>> "If not us, who?
>>
>> If not now, when?"
>>
>> - Unknown
>>
>
>
> =======================================================
> 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 <mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> =======================================================
>
>
>
>
> --
> Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)
> art.deco.studios at gmail.com <mailto:art.deco.studios at gmail.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
> =======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120325/0a4a90c5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 248047 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120325/0a4a90c5/attachment-0001.jpe>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list