<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:tahoma, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Problem is you cannot vote your <SPAN style="RIGHT: auto" id=misspell-0><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">conscience</SPAN></SPAN> if you have to<VAR id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR> choose from one of the people on the ballot.</SPAN></div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma, new york, times, serif; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 16px; RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Donovan J. Arnold </SPAN></div>
<div><BR></div>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: tahoma, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV style="RIGHT: auto" dir=ltr><FONT size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px" class=hr contentEditable=false readonly="true"></DIV><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe@gmail.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> Paul Rumelhart <godshatter@yahoo.com> <BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Cc:</SPAN></B> vision 2020 <vision2020@moscow.com> <BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Sunday, September 2, 2012 11:34 AM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [Vision2020] <SPAN id=misspell-2 class=mark>FW</SPAN>: Party of <SPAN id=misspell-3 class=mark>Strivers</SPAN><BR></FONT></DIV><BR>Good advice!<BR><BR>On Sun, <SPAN id=misspell-4 class=mark>Sep</SPAN>
2, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Paul Rumelhart <<A href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</A>> wrote:<BR>><BR>> My advice? Vote for the candidate you think is best and let the politicos<BR>> in Washington worry about their own strategies.<BR>><BR>> Paul<BR>><BR>> On 09/02/2012 11:02 AM, Joe Campbell wrote:<BR>>><BR>>> I admit that if I could get EVERYONE to vote for a third party<BR>>> candidate it would send a message to Washington. But if only SOME of<BR>>> the people vote for that candidate, what message gets sent? What<BR>>> message did we send to Washington when Ralph Nader ran as a third<BR>>> party candidate against Bush and Gore? The message was that Bush WON<BR>>> the election, paving the way for the rising of the deficit, more wars<BR>>> than I can count, the worst recession in recent history, etc. This is<BR>>>
the baggage that Obama was handed, the same baggage that Romney is now<BR>>> trying to stick to Obama. It seems like a nice idea but you'd have a<BR>>> hard time convincing me that we'd be worse off if those free thinkers<BR>>> had voted for Gore instead of Nader. The Bush-Gore-Nader election is a<BR>>> perfect example of how dangerous a third party candidate vote can be.<BR>>><BR>>> But I'm not really trying to tell you who to vote for; just explaining<BR>>> why I won't vote your way.<BR>>><BR>>> On Sun, <SPAN id=misspell-6 class=mark>Sep</SPAN> 2, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Paul Rumelhart <<A href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</A>><BR>>> wrote:<BR>>>><BR>>>> THAT is a great measure of how broken this system is. You want to send a<BR>>>> message to Washington? Get everyone you know to vote for a
third party<BR>>>> candidate. It doesn't matter who. If those numbers are large enough to<BR>>>> start messing up their math, they will take notice. If it truly doesn't<BR>>>> matter whether Romney wins or Obama does, and if you are at all unhappy<BR>>>> with<BR>>>> this idea, then the next logical thing to do is to vote for somebody<BR>>>> else.<BR>>>><BR>>>> Paul<BR>>>><BR>>>> On 09/02/2012 10:23 AM, Joe Campbell wrote:<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> I don't see much of a difference between this and not voting at all.<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> On Sun, <SPAN id=misspell-8 class=mark>Sep</SPAN> 2, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Paul Rumelhart <<A href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</A>><BR>>>>> wrote:<BR>>>>>><BR>>>>>> That would be
true if those were our only two choices. I don't know if<BR>>>>>> any<BR>>>>>> 3rd party candidates will make the ballot in Idaho, but you can always<BR>>>>>> write<BR>>>>>> somebody in. I'm still thinking of writing in Ron Paul, since he's the<BR>>>>>> only<BR>>>>>> guy out there that even makes noise about this kind of stuff, but I'll<BR>>>>>> also<BR>>>>>> be looking into 3rd party candidates as well.<BR>>>>>><BR>>>>>> Paul<BR>>>>>><BR>>>>>><BR>>>>>> On 09/02/2012 07:51 AM, Joe Campbell wrote:<BR>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>> How can "Obama is just like all the other politicians" or "It doesn't<BR>>>>>>> matter who is President since he has no control over the military" be<BR>>>>>>> a
reason for NOT voting for Obama rather than some other guy? You go<BR>>>>>>> into a restaurant and there are two tables. The hostess asks you if<BR>>>>>>> you want to sit in table A or table B. You say: "Well table A is just<BR>>>>>>> like table B, so I don't want to sit there." Makes no sense.<BR>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>> Of course, if both tables are equally bad you might not want to sit at<BR>>>>>>> either. But in this case eventually you'll be sitting at one of the<BR>>>>>>> tables. They are both the same in one respect (evil foreign policy)<BR>>>>>>> but one is considerably better in another respect (one has an evil<BR>>>>>>> domestic policy as well).<BR>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>> I don't like the fact that my presidential choices are often
choosing<BR>>>>>>> between the lesser of two evils but given that this one is ...<BR>>>>>>> Personally, I wouldn't be comforted by not voting, by saying "I'm not<BR>>>>>>> the one who elected that guy," especially given that our country is<BR>>>>>>> structured such that it doesn't matter who's in charge. There is<BR>>>>>>> something wrong with the US foreign policy and like it or not we're<BR>>>>>>> all implicated in that wrongness in some small way for letting it get<BR>>>>>>> this bad.<BR>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>> The big problem with our political system is that we want someone who<BR>>>>>>> is perfect, no spots on their record. But no one who is an eligible<BR>>>>>>> presidential candidate -- over 45 (practically speaking) and rich --<BR>>>>>>>
is going to be perfect. What we get are folks who look perfect because<BR>>>>>>> they've been careful their whole lives to be deceptive and seem good,<BR>>>>>>> and honest, and socially conscious while all the time being selfish,<BR>>>>>>> and egotistical, and power hungry. A lot like divorce lawyers, so our<BR>>>>>>> presidency is hardly the only part of our society where this<BR>>>>>>> phenomenon exists.<BR>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>> On Sat, <SPAN id=misspell-10 class=mark>Sep</SPAN> 1, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Paul Rumelhart <<A href="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:godshatter@yahoo.com">godshatter@yahoo.com</A>><BR>>>>>>> wrote:<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> I'm with <SPAN id=misspell-12 class=mark>Sunil</SPAN> on this
topic.<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> With Obama getting no traction on getting out of either front (Iraq<BR>>>>>>>> or<BR>>>>>>>> Afghanistan), with his willingness to go into Libya (at least with<BR>>>>>>>> air<BR>>>>>>>> support), with his inability to get <SPAN id=misspell-13 class=mark>Gitmo</SPAN> closed down and those<BR>>>>>>>> incarcerated<BR>>>>>>>> to stand a real trial, and with his willingness to run the<BR>>>>>>>> assassination-by-drone program, I can come up with only two possible<BR>>>>>>>> conclusions about Obama:<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> 1. Obama is just like any other politician, he jumped on the<BR>>>>>>>> "change"<BR>>>>>>>> bandwagon and has turned
out to be cut from the same cloth as<BR>>>>>>>> everyone<BR>>>>>>>> else.<BR>>>>>>>> He talks a good game, but has no intention of actually doing what he<BR>>>>>>>> says.<BR>>>>>>>> This is my basic assumption. It's a horrible thing, especially since<BR>>>>>>>> I<BR>>>>>>>> fell<BR>>>>>>>> for his "change" and "see, I'm not like Bush" lies. But it's better<BR>>>>>>>> than<BR>>>>>>>> this possibility:<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> 2. The Office of the President has for all intents and purposes lost<BR>>>>>>>> control of this nation's military. Basically, those in control are<BR>>>>>>>> so<BR>>>>>>>> powerful that a sitting
President will bow to their will despite<BR>>>>>>>> their<BR>>>>>>>> ideological differences.<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> Let's hope it's only the first one.<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> Paul<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> On 09/01/2012 05:59 PM, <SPAN id=misspell-14 class=mark>Sunil</SPAN> <SPAN id=misspell-15 class=mark>Ramalingam</SPAN> wrote:<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> Joe,<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> I agree with you on the first half of your argument. Given his<BR>>>>>>>> willingness<BR>>>>>>>> to cave in to the Republicans (well, is it caving, or does he believe<BR>>>>>>>> in<BR>>>>>>>>
what he does?) as well as his willingness to put Social Security and<BR>>>>>>>> Medicare on the table, I don't agree with the second half of your<BR>>>>>>>> argument.<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> But for me, by continuing the Bush foreign policy he forfeits my<BR>>>>>>>> support,<BR>>>>>>>> meaningless as that is. I think people who are against that foreign<BR>>>>>>>> policy<BR>>>>>>>> need to say "I will not vote for anyone who does this." Without that<BR>>>>>>>> message, the policies will continue. I don't expect better from the<BR>>>>>>>> Republicans on this point, but I do expect better from the guy who<BR>>>>>>>> promised<BR>>>>>>>> change. I think we are fools to reward him for spitting in our
faces.<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> And it's bigger than just the foreign policy issue. <SPAN id=misspell-16 class=mark>Cusack</SPAN> and <SPAN id=misspell-17 class=mark>Turley</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>> also<BR>>>>>>>> talk about the meaning of the decision to let the torturers walk, and<BR>>>>>>>> the<BR>>>>>>>> assassination policy. The latter is an unconstitutional power grab.<BR>>>>>>>> Bush<BR>>>>>>>> went to town violating the Constitution, and Obama is doing the same.<BR>>>>>>>> Do<BR>>>>>>>> you<BR>>>>>>>> think the next president will be any different? We're on the road to<BR>>>>>>>> hell<BR>>>>>>>> if<BR>>>>>>>> we don't say
'No.'<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> People who think the Constitution and it's balance of power and due<BR>>>>>>>> process<BR>>>>>>>> are important are not supporting those values if they vote for Obama.<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-18 class=mark>Sunil</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 1 <SPAN id=misspell-19 class=mark>Sep</SPAN> 2012 15:34:37 -0700<BR>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] <SPAN id=misspell-20 class=mark>FW</SPAN>: Party of <SPAN id=misspell-21 class=mark>Strivers</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>> From: <A href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com" ymailto="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>> To: <A href="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com"
ymailto="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com">sunilramalingam@hotmail.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>> CC: <A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>> My argument is more like this: Romney and Obama are the same when it<BR>>>>>>>>> comes to foreign policy but Obama is better when it comes to the<BR>>>>>>>>> policies within our borders. Joe<BR>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>> On Sat, <SPAN id=misspell-22 class=mark>Sep</SPAN> 1, 2012 at 3:00 PM, <SPAN id=misspell-23 class=mark>Sunil</SPAN> <SPAN id=misspell-24 class=mark>Ramalingam</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>> <<A href="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com" ymailto="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com">sunilramalingam@hotmail.com</A>>
wrote:<BR>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>> Joe,<BR>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>> I understand a lot of people say that as they continue to support<BR>>>>>>>>>> Obama,<BR>>>>>>>>>> and<BR>>>>>>>>>> this is ultimately their position:<BR>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>> 'I don't care about atrocities he commits outside our borders, as<BR>>>>>>>>>> long<BR>>>>>>>>>> as I<BR>>>>>>>>>> can support his policies within our borders.'<BR>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>> I can't go along with that any more. I'm not pretending Romney will<BR>>>>>>>>>> be<BR>>>>>>>>>>
any<BR>>>>>>>>>> better on foreign policy, but he can't get much worse.<BR>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-25 class=mark>Sunil</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Sat, 1 <SPAN id=misspell-26 class=mark>Sep</SPAN> 2012 14:52:54 -0700<BR>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] <SPAN id=misspell-27 class=mark>FW</SPAN>: Party of <SPAN id=misspell-28 class=mark>Strivers</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>> From: <A href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com" ymailto="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">philosopher.joe@gmail.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>> To: <A href="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com" ymailto="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com">sunilramalingam@hotmail.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>> CC: <A
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>> It is a tough decision. I agree with you that Obama was no better<BR>>>>>>>>>>> in<BR>>>>>>>>>>> many respects than Bush, not <SPAN id=misspell-29 class=mark>wrt</SPAN> military involvement at least.<BR>>>>>>>>>>> But<BR>>>>>>>>>>> I<BR>>>>>>>>>>> fear that if a Republican gets elected there will be a rollback of<BR>>>>>>>>>>> abortion rights and other rights. Joe<BR>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, <SPAN id=misspell-30 class=mark>Sep</SPAN> 1, 2012 at 2:35 PM, <SPAN id=misspell-31 class=mark>Sunil</SPAN> <SPAN id=misspell-32
class=mark>Ramalingam</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>> <<A href="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com" ymailto="mailto:sunilramalingam@hotmail.com">sunilramalingam@hotmail.com</A>> wrote:<BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> 'Party loyalty is blind...and deaf and dumb...and cruel.'<BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm about half way through this interview of Jonathan <SPAN id=misspell-33 class=mark>Turley</SPAN> by<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> John<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-34 class=mark>Cusack</SPAN>,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> looking at <SPAN id=misspell-35 class=mark>Obama's</SPAN> repugnant foreign
policy:<BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> <A href="http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/11264-john-cusack-and-jonathan-turley-on-obamas-constitution" target=_blank>http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/11264-john-cusack-and-jonathan-turley-on-obamas-constitution</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> A s long as we support the people implementing these policies,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> they<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> will<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> go<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> on. I'm not voting for Obama again,
because of this.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-36 class=mark>Sunil</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: <A href="mailto:betsyd@turbonet.com" ymailto="mailto:betsyd@turbonet.com">betsyd@turbonet.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: <A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:57:13 -0700<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Vision2020] <SPAN id=misspell-37 class=mark>FW</SPAN>: Party of <SPAN id=misspell-38
class=mark>Strivers</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Betsy <SPAN id=misspell-39 class=mark>Dickow</SPAN> [<SPAN id=misspell-40 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:betsyd@turbonet.com" ymailto="mailto:betsyd@turbonet.com">betsyd@turbonet.com</A>]<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 10:57 AM<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: 'Joe Campbell'<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Party of <SPAN id=misspell-41 class=mark>Strivers</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> And most of the poor will be poor through not
fault of their<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> own...how<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> many<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> people are working hard and often overtime at the University of<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Idaho<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> not making ends meet...many many many. And here it's no<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> different<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> from<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Wall Street corporate model...administrators win big and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> everyone<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> else<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>
is<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> a<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> peon, working for peanuts.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is democracy? No, this is the will of a few billionaires<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republican Party...Get your head out of the sand and stop<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> thinking<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> in<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> terms<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> of party loyalty.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Party loyalty is blind...and deaf and dumb...and
cruel.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: <A href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> [<SPAN id=misspell-42 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:vision2020-bounces@moscow.com">vision2020-bounces@moscow.com</A>]<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Behalf Of Joe Campbell<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 10:46
AM<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: <SPAN id=misspell-43 class=mark>lfalen</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cc: <A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Party of <SPAN id=misspell-44 class=mark>Strivers</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> How is Ayn Rand's philosophy basically correct? Do you think the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> poor<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> are<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> lazy? Do you disagree that some people have a bad lot and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> without<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> some<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>
kind<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> of outside assistance, they are unlikely to realize the American<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> dream?<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> If<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> so, then Rand is just plain wrong. Tweaking her view to allow<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> for<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> compassion<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> is in this case equivalent to rejecting her view. That is what<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> separates<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rand's philosophy from the kind of view that Brooks is<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> suggesting.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brooks'<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> offers a much better, more realistic
take on humanity, as I see<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Joe<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 10:18 AM, <SPAN id=misspell-45 class=mark>lfalen</SPAN> <<A href="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com" ymailto="mailto:lfalen@turbonet.com">lfalen@turbonet.com</A>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not a big fan of David Brooks, but this is not a bad<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> article.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rice also. I have
some problems with Ayn Rand. Her philosophy is<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-46 class=mark>basicly</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct, but it need s to be tempered by some compassion, which<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> she<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> seems<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> to<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> lack.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roger<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----Original message-----<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From: Art Deco <A href="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com" ymailto="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com">art.deco.studios@gmail.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 03:51:28
-0700<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: <A href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: [Vision2020] Party of <SPAN id=misspell-47 class=mark>Strivers</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [image: The New York Times] <<A href="http://www.nytimes.com/" target=_blank>http://www.nytimes.com/</A>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<A
href="http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&opzn&page=ww" target=_blank>http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&<SPAN id=misspell-48 class=mark>opzn</SPAN>&page=<SPAN id=misspell-49 class=mark>ww</SPAN></A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> w.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&<SPAN id=misspell-50 class=mark>pos</SPAN>=Position1&<SPAN id=misspell-51 class=mark>sn</SPAN>2=336c557e/4f3dd5d2&<SPAN id=misspell-52
class=mark>sn</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1=34<SPAN id=misspell-53 class=mark>aeaaa</SPAN>2/80e4<SPAN id=misspell-54 class=mark>ddbc</SPAN>&camp=<SPAN id=misspell-55 class=mark>FSL</SPAN>2012_<SPAN id=misspell-56 class=mark>ArticleTools</SPAN>_120x60_1787508c_<SPAN id=misspell-57
class=mark>nyt</SPAN>5&ad<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =<SPAN id=misspell-58 class=mark>BOSW</SPAN>_120x60_June13_<SPAN id=misspell-59 class=mark>NoText</SPAN>&<SPAN id=misspell-60 class=mark>goto</SPAN>=<SPAN id=misspell-61 class=mark>http</SPAN>%3A%2F%2<SPAN id=misspell-62 class=mark>Fwww</SPAN>%2<SPAN id=misspell-63 class=mark>Efoxsearchlight</SPAN>%2<SPAN id=misspell-64 class=mark>Ec</SPAN><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> om%2<SPAN id=misspell-65
class=mark>Fbeastsofthesouthernwild</SPAN>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> August 30, 2012<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Party of <SPAN id=misspell-66 class=mark>Strivers</SPAN> By DAVID<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BROOKS<<A href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/c"
target=_blank>http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/c</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-67 class=mark>olumnists</SPAN>/<SPAN id=misspell-68 class=mark>davidbrooks</SPAN>/index.<SPAN id=misspell-69 class=mark>html</SPAN>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> America was built by materialistic and sometimes superficial<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-70 class=mark>strivers</SPAN>. It was built by pioneers who voluntarily subjected<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> themselves to stone-age conditions on the frontier fired by<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dreams<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> riches. It was built
by immigrants who crammed themselves into<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hellish tenements because they thought it would lead, for<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> children, to big houses, big cars and big lives.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> America has always been defined by this ferocious commercial<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> energy,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this zealotry for self-transformation, which leads its<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> citizens<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vacation less, work longer, consume more and invent
more.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Many Americans, and many foreign observers, are ambivalent<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offended by this driving material ambition. Read "The Great<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gatsby."<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Read D.H. Lawrence on Benjamin Franklin.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But today's Republican Party unabashedly celebrates this<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ambition<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> definition of success. Speaker after speaker at the convention<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tampa, Fla., celebrated the <SPAN id=misspell-71 class=mark>striver</SPAN>, who started small,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> struggled<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hard, looked within and became wealthy. Speaker after speaker<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argued<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that this ideal of success is under assault by Democrats who<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> look<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> down on <SPAN id=misspell-72 class=mark>strivers</SPAN>, who undermine self-reliance with
government<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependency, who smother ambition under regulations.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans promised to get government out of the way. Reduce<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> burden of debt. Offer Americans an open field and a fair<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chance<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> let their ambition run.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you believe, as I do, that American institutions are<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
hitting<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> creaky middle age, then you have a lot of time for this<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argument.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you believe that there has been a hardening of the national<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> arteries<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused by a labyrinthine tax code, an unsustainable Medicare<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> program<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a suicidal addiction to deficits, then you appreciate this<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> streamlining agenda, even if you don't buy into the whole
Ayn<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rand-influenced gospel of wealth.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the one hand, you see the Republicans taking the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> initiative,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offering rejuvenating reform. On the other hand, you see an<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exhausted<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Democratic Party, which says: We don't have an agenda, but we<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> really<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> don't like theirs. Given these options, the choice is pretty<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
clear.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But there is a flaw in the vision the Republicans offered in<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tampa.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is contained in its rampant <SPAN id=misspell-73 class=mark>hyperindividualism</SPAN>. Speaker<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> speaker celebrated the solitary and heroic individual. There<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> almost no talk of community and compassionate conservatism.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
was<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certainly no conservatism as Edmund Burke understood it, in<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> individuals are embedded in webs of customs, traditions,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> habits<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> governing institutions.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today's Republicans strongly believe that individuals<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determine<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own fates. In a Pew Research
Center<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> poll<<A href="http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/partisan-polarization-sur" target=_blank>http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/partisan-polarization-sur</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-74 class=mark>ges</SPAN>-in-bush-obama-years/>, for example, 57 percent of<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Republicans<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe people are poor because they don't work hard. Only 28<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
percent<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> believe people are poor because of circumstances beyond their<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> control. These Republicans believe that if only government<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gets<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the way, then people's innate qualities will enable them to<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> flourish.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But there's a problem. I see what the G.O.P. is offering the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> engineering major from Purdue or the business major from<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Arizona<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> State. The party is offering skilled people the freedom to run<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> race. I don't see what the party is offering the waitress with<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> two<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kids, or the warehouse worker whose wages have stagnated for a<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> decade, or the factory worker whose skills are now obsolete.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The fact is our destinies are shaped by social forces much<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> more<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
than<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the current G.O.P. is willing to admit. The skills that enable<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to flourish are not innate but constructed by circumstances.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Government does not always undermine initiative. Some<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> government<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> programs, like the G.I. Bill, inflame ambition. Others depress<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What matters is not whether a program is public or private but<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
its<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> effect<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> on character.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today's Republicans, who see every government program as a<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> step<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the road to serfdom, are often blind to that. They celebrate<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> race<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to success but don't know how to give everyone access to that<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
race.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The wisest speech departed from the prevailing story line. It<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> delivered by <SPAN id=misspell-75 class=mark>Condoleezza</SPAN> Rice. It echoed an older, less<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> libertarian<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conservatism, which <SPAN id=misspell-76 class=mark>harkens</SPAN> back to Washington, Tocqueville<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lincoln. The powerful words in her speech were not "I" and<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "me"<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
-<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heroic individual They were "we" and "us" - citizens who<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emerge<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of and exist as participants in a great national project.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rice celebrated material striving but also larger national<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> goals<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the long national struggle to extend benefits and mobilize all<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
human<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> potential. She subtly emphasized how our individual destinies<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dependent upon the social fabric and upon public institutions<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> like<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> schools, just laws and our mission in the world. She put less<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> emphasis on commerce and more on citizenship.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Today's Republican Party may be able to perform useful tasks<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
its<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> current <SPAN id=misspell-77 class=mark>hyperindividualistic</SPAN> mentality. But its commercial<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> soul<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too narrow. It won't be a worthy governing party until it<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> treads<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> course Lincoln trod: starting with individual ambition but<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ascending<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a larger vision and creating a national environment that<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
arouses<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ambition and nurtures success.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <A href="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com" ymailto="mailto:art.deco.studios@gmail.com">art.deco.studios@gmail.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet, serving<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-78 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-79 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-80
class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-81 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> serving the communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-82 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/"
target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-83 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> serving the communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-84 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR>>>>>>>>>>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-85 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>>>>>> serving the communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-86 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR>>>>>>>>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR>>>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-87 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>>>> serving the communities of the <SPAN id=misspell-88 class=mark>Palouse</SPAN> since 1994.<BR>>>>>>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR>>>>>>>> <SPAN id=misspell-89 class=mark>mailto</SPAN>:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>><BR>>>>>>>> =======================================================<BR>>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>>>>>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>>>>>>>> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR>>>>>>>> mailto:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>>>>>>>>
=======================================================<BR>>>>>><BR>>>>>><BR>><BR><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net/</A><BR> mailto:<A href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com" ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR><BR><BR></DIV></DIV></div></body></html>