Conference back40::soapbox

    No more so than Susan B. Anthony. Because of Her movement to give so
    many rights to women does that make her any less great? 

	My point was that MLK's birthday should not be a holiday (at least 
federal, states can decide for themselves).  

	I wanted to know why we need one.

ME

    So, did you come here for an argument or for some abuse?
    
    Yer likely to get both, yaknow... :-)
    

	I can imagine, and expect, abuse.

ME

    New Hampshire has named today Civil Rights day.  That way they can
    honor ALL people who have fought for civil rights in America, from
    Susan B Antony to Martin Luther King and beyond.

    All three showed extraordinary bravery and vision, combined with
    enormous skill in practical politics.  That would be enough to place 
    them all in the American pantheon of political heroes.
    
    But they each deserve a national holiday because they symbolize the
    dangerous periods of vast social, economic, and political change that
    they led.
    
    The fact that Washington and Lincoln now share a holiday is simpy a
    manifestation of the politics of holidays -- they had the bad manners
    to be born too close to each other in February. It in no way diminishes 
    their lustre.
    
    Anyways, places like Digital refuse to recognize any of them as
    important enough to be honored with a day off, so we'll have to honor
    them in our hearts.  
    
    "National holiday", indeed!
    
    Kit
    

    
    New Hampshire has named today Civil Rights Day because their "citizen
    legislature" if filled with just enough idiots who can't think.
    
    								-mr. bill

     Moron alert.

    
    Evidently Jesse Jackson showed up at some NH churches yesterday to
    preach and promised them that NH would soon change Civil Rights Day to 
    MLKJr Day.
    
    What he has to do with NH I don't know.
                             

     He's just using the MLK day issue to test the waters for yet another
    fruitless presidential run.
    
     And I don't look for NH to toe the line on MLK day any time soon.

    
    After all, Dr. King is still a good commie.
    
    								-mr. bill

    
    <--------
    
      Tell you what.... You let me read what the shut up in a vault for 50
    years and let me decide for myself whether there should be a MLK
    holiday.... deal??

RE: 252.7 by PERFOM::LICEA_KANE "when it's comin' from the left"

> New Hampshire has named today Civil Rights Day because their "citizen
> legislature" if filled with just enough idiots who can't think.
               ^^
"isn't",  perhaps?  :-)

IMNHO,  Civil Rights Day is the best way to honor Dr King.  


Phil

>  <<< Note 252.12 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI "Zebras should be seen and not herd" >>>
>                          -< Happy Civil Rights Day! >-
>
>    
>    <--------
>    
>      Tell you what.... You let me read what the shut up in a vault for 50
>    years and let me decide for myself whether there should be a MLK
>    holiday.... deal??
    
    Tell you what....If you haven't figured out yet what MLK did for this
    country, no Geraldo act at the vault door is going to change your mind.
    So why pretend you care what's in these vaults?
    
    Kit

    Spoken like true liberalism...defeatist attitude and all!
    
    Andy, what's this about a closed vault?!
    
    Mr. Bill, aren't you slapping women in the face...neglecting what is
    due Susan B. Anthony and all that?!

    Just another "national holiday" not recognized by DEC...
    
    I like the idea of "Civil Rights Day", as there were many people who
    helped in this area.  We don't have enough days in the year to have
    everyone's birthday a holiday (heck, the mail would never get delivered
    if we made all historically significant people's B.Day into a holiday).
    
    -steve

    
    RE: .14
    
    Free Clue...
    
      Yes, I DO know what he did, along with all the others...
    
    As usual, the deflection is away from the gist of what I said. If you
    go back and really try to comprehend, I stated I would like to decide
    if HE ALONE deserves an "MLK Day"...

    re .17
    
    Free clue for you.
    
    I already answered why him above all others: because he was the man
    who had the vision, the political smarts and the organizing skill to
    lead a national movement that changed the course of history and went
    further toward expunging our chief national shame then anything since
    the Civil War.
    
    He is thus appropriately memoralized as a symbol of that seminal
    historical moment, and as the recognized leader of those who made that
    moment memorable. In the the same way, Washington and Lincoln are
    memoralized both for the fateful historical moments in which they led,
    and for their personal qualities of leadership. 
    
    Such recognition in no way detracts from the others, famous and
    not-so-famous, who participated in making the history for which
    Washington, Lincoln and King serve as symbols.
    
    Fortunately, King's contribution is safely beyond the grasp the
    rervanchists who snipe at him in a rear-guard action to fend off what
    he fought for.
    
    Kit   
    

	Washington & Lincoln had their birthdays celebrated seperately at one
time. Even I remember that. You would get Washington's off, but not Lincolns.
Of course the government took both..... :-)

	MLK did some great things for this country. As many have stated, he
deserves his own day. I'm glad he has it.


Glen

    
    Some reflections...
    
    
    The FBI (J. Edgar Hoover) had kept Dr. King at arms lenght as long as
    he was fighting for the Civil Rights of Black people alone. However, when 
    he broadened his scope to defend the Civil Rights of ALL (read Black, White,
    Yellow, Red...) poor and opressed people, he became a threat (sp?) to
    the establishment.... and the rest is history...    :-(
    
    Who knows how many non-Blacks are beneficiaries of his efforts....

.6>    Anyways, places like Digital refuse to recognize any of them as

That's what I thought until I received a mail message containing this -

>	A previous messege sent this morning, indicated that the
>	CSD DVN scheduled for Monday, Jan.16 was cancelled due to
>	the Martin King Holiday.
>
>	This broadcast will be shown on Monday as orginally planned,
>	and re-broadcast on Tuesday for those sites that closed in
>	observance of this holiday...

Anybody know which DIGITAL sites are closed today?

ALF in Atlanta has proclaimed this the Location Choice holiday. Of course the 
people manning the Customer Support Center must be here anyway since the 
majority of our customers do not recognize the holiday.

    shouldn't that be "... the people PERSONNING the Customer Support
    Center..."
    
    	don't wanna get the PC vigilantes all riled up now, y'hear.

I guess being Politically Correct is not my forte today. I stand ashamedly 
corrected...

    I suppose if you wanted to be on the edge you could say "personning".
    Maybe someday it might even not sound goofy. But it does. For now, why
    not just say "staffing"?  
    
    Or, stick with "manning". People know what you're getting at, and most
    don't mind an old habit. But don't be surprised when people notice that
    part of your use is based on that chip on your shoulder, as evidenced
    by smug comments about "PC".
    
    Kit

    Kit,  I think there was a tongue in that cheek somewhere :-).  

    Jeez, I hope so

    
    RE: .18
    
    Why is it so difficult for you to understand that I would like to see
    what was locked up before rendering a judgment as to the
    appropriateness of an MLK Day...???
    
    
     If they decided to make a National Law Enforcement Day in honor of J.
    Edgar Hoover and there was a bunch of stuff they wouldn't let you see
    for 50 years in relation to his activities, wouldn't you be the least
    bit suspicious???
    
      Naaaaaaah.... you'd of course accept all the man has done for law
    enforcement and honor his full memory... right?
    

    I think, from a personal standpoint, there shouldn't be any
    days honoring anybody.  But, that's for spiritual reasons.
    I think the first guy that named anything after anybody was
    Cain having a city named after his first son.  Not a good
    precedent!
    
    Anyway, to speak of MLK from the perspective of other folks
    who have days and not from the above...
    
    Part of me thinks its great and especially so because Martin
    Luther King (to me) is not synonymous with one individual, it
    is synonymous with an entire people, who have endured a lot
    of crap.  To me, its an honoring of an entire culture and a
    recognition of an entire people that has been stigmatized in
    more ways than one.  I can reflect on how it is that people 
    can treat each other so badly, etc., etc.  To me, MLK is synony-
    mous with civil rights, but his name is better as its focal
    point is still a people for whom this nation certainly has
    an especially sensitive history with.
    
    On a practical side though is the thought that holidays reap
    indolence.  How many holidays does a nation have?  I think we've
    reached our upper limit!  Twelve or so is plenty enough!  You 
    can't just keep having holidays!
                                    
                                                    Tony

    New Hampshire doesnt celibrate Columbis day.... Non of the clergy have
    came to NH brow beating us on that.

    re: .28  
    
    The point is that what King did to move us closer to our national
    ideals is indisputable.  His place in history is made. No personal
    pecacadillos collected by J. Edgar Hoover (or even by somebody
    reputable) is ever going to detract from what he and his movement 
    did for this country.
    
    Your flanking attack on his legacy can mean one of two things:
    
    1) You really believe that personal sins and weaknesses are more
    important in assessing a political figure than what he or she did
    (this is the People Magazine view of history, a rampant and dangerous
    trend in recent American history)
    
    
    2) You disagree with what he accomplished and believe that by seizing
    on the distraction of the People Magazine view of history you can get
    people to repudiate his legacy.
    
    The answers to the two scenarios:
    
    1) You're wrong
    
    2) You'll fail
    
    Kit

    
    
    And you're all wet....
    
    Once again..... 
    
    
      LET ME DECIDE!!!
    

    .29
    
    Why is 12 or so the upper limit?  The US is at the bottom end of
    holidays in the developed world.  And just to get into a rat-hole the 2
    weeks vacation is a joke.
    
    As more work gets more automated e need more holidays.

    re: .32
    
    QED

| <<< Note 252.28 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI "Zebras should be seen and not herd" >>>



| If they decided to make a National Law Enforcement Day in honor of J. Edgar 
| Hoover and there was a bunch of stuff they wouldn't let you see for 50 years 
| in relation to his activities, wouldn't you be the least bit suspicious???

	You mean we may never get to see the gowns he wore????



Glen

    >Your flanking attack on his legacy can mean one of two things:
    
     You just don't get it, do you, guvnah? You really cannot imagine the
    possibility of a third.
    
     I personally believe that Civil Rights Day is superior to Martin
    Luther King, Jr, day because it is inclusive of everyone who has worked
    for civil rights. While MLK was the greatest figure of this century, he
    was not the only one, and the fight for civil rights clearly transcends
    the man. This belief is borne neither out of racism nor an obsession
    with titillating tales of concupiscence. It is a reasoned belief, a
    different point of view, but one certainly no less valid than your own.
    Your abject dismissal of even the _possibility_ that another legitimate 
    point of view exists serves only to undermine your own position, for
    what position can truly be sound if it cannot be questioned, if it
    cannot answer scrutiny? It's precisely this sort of shouting down of
    opposing viewpoints, of blatant supercilious disrespect that makes
    intellectual political discussion so god damned difficult. And it
    happens on both sides of the aisle. 
    
     Well, guess what. I've got a different belief than you, and I'm not
    going to let you get away with the power play that makes my position
    inferior by definition. That's nonsense, and only works when people are
    too stupid to see the stunt you're trying to pull. Do you think you're
    doing anything any different then what the people who tried to minimize
    the reverend's accomplishments by calling him a commie? You aren't. You
    want to frame the debate by saying "you must believe X or you are a bad
    person." That's a pile of crap. That's no way to carry on a debate, and
    furthermore, your assessment of the situation is simply wrong.

    re .36
    
 >   for civil rights. While MLK was the greatest figure of this century, he
 >   was not the only one, 
    
    Huh? He either was or wasn't (which incidentally, was not a claim I
    made)
    
 >   and the fight for civil rights clearly transcends  the man.
    
    Hello?  How many times do I have to make that point. Just as the fight
    for freedom and the establishment of a new nation transcends the man
    Washington. Ditto for Lincoln.
    
    I put forward a reasoned argument -- that as both the symbol of 
    and premier leader of the civil rights movement, King is eminently
    worthy of the recognition inherent in a national holiday. It is a good
    and worthy use of our heroes to use them as symbols of eras and of
    important principles established in those eras
    
    Mr. K's problem seems to be, at least on the surface, that he thinks some
    unnamed facts are going to show he was not a worthy man. I say that
    what happened with his leadership already settles that question.
     
    I haven't the slighest idea what *your* problem is with the man you you
    call "the greatest figure of this century". If it includes toppling him
    from his role as both the leader and the symbol of the most significant
    social and political movement in this country in 100 years, I will
    gladly debate you. You may well have something to say that modifies my
    point of view. Or, I may disagree as strenously as I did with the
    elusive Mr. K. I tried to get him to offer such an opinion. I took his
    last reply as evidence that I had flushed him out, and he essentially
    "took the fifth" rather than get to the heart of what was on his mind.
    
    But, pray,  don't bother to dissuade me by silly attacks
    about my "blatant supercilious disrespect" from getting people to explain
    themselves.
    
    Kit.

    >Huh? He either was or wasn't (which incidentally, was not a claim I
    >made)
    
     What was unclear? I said that MLK was the greatest civil rights figure
    in this century, but that there were other civil rights figures as
    well. Remember Rosa Parks? Malcolm X?
    
    >Hello?  How many times do I have to make that point. Just as the fight
    >for freedom and the establishment of a new nation transcends the
    >man Washington. Ditto for Lincoln.
    
     Neither of whom have holidays dedicated for them at this point. They
    get lumped into Presidents' Day. But apparently what's good enough for
    Washington and Lincoln is not good enough for the supporters of Martin
    Luther King, Jr. My position is that there is nothing about MLK that
    makes him more worthy of a day in his honor than either of the other
    two gentlemen, and in fact a more inclusive holiday is more in keeping
    with his preaching than a day dedicated solely to the man.
    
    

    re: .39
    
    As for Washington and Lincoln, as I said at the beginning of the
    string, they were victims of the Monday holiday movement. I think they
    should still have their days.
    
    Actually you said King was "the greatest figure of the century", and I
    misread the rest of the statement to mean there were other "greatest
    figures of the century". 
    
  >  and in fact a more inclusive holiday is more in keeping
  >  with his preaching than a day dedicated solely to the man.
    
    There, we have a straight-forward counter-position.  I can tell the
    difference between that statement and the wink-nudge subtext of the
    line of argument put forth by Mr. K -- the, I repeat, flank
    attack, that was used against the civil rights movement, against King,
    against the establishment of a day to honor King *or* a day to honor
    the civil rights movement.   Can't you?
    
    Kit

    
    RE: .38
    
    >Mr. K's problem seems to be, at least on the surface, that he thinks
    >some unnamed facts are going to show he was not a worthy man. I say
    >that what happened with his leadership already settles that question.
    
      Great Mr. B.... I like that ... "at least on the surface,..."
    
     You really do have a comprehension problem and evidently your
    spin-meter is on the fritz...  
    
      "Elusive"???
    
      Read the freakin reply I put in!!!
    
     I stated (elusively I guess to some) that I recognize Martin Luther
    King's accomplishments!! What is so hard to understand about that?
    Where did I say he was not worthy (besides in your own convoluted
    mind)????
    
      What is wrong with knowing all there is to know about the man??
    Are you afraid to let me see? Why is the goverment afraid to let me
    see? Why do we have to wait 50 years? Is it because human nature by
    that time will forget and MLK will be too god-like for any of it to
    matter???
    
      What are you afraid of???  
    
    (Sheeeeeeeesh! Talk about who's being elusive!!)
    
     

RE: 252.40 by DOCTP::BINNS

> As for Washington and Lincoln, as I said at the beginning of the string, 
> they were victims of the Monday holiday movement. I think they should 
> still have their days.

I do not think that we need a day to honor any person,  regardless of how
great.


Phil

>I do not think that we need a day to honor any person,  regardless of how
>great.

    
    re. 42
    
>I do not think that we need a day to honor any person,  regardless of how
>great.
    
    Well, there certainly is the danger of attributing to one person the
    efforts of many. And in the past we've mistakenly made gods
    out of those who were only our heroes.
    
    But I still think the symbol of a pre-eminent leader of an important
    era is a useful way to approach the subject, if we don't abuse the
    honor.
    
    Kit 

I think we ought to have a day for Washington. Not because he was a
great president, he really wan't all that special at it. And not
because he was a great general, either, he probably wasn't any better
at it than Grant. I think he deserves a day because when they wanted to
make him king he refused and when they asked him if he would serve a
third term as president he refused. I admire him for being big enough
not to want the whole pie.

					-K-

    Re: .41
    
    >Where did I say he was not worthy
    
    You have said you haven't decided if he was worthy.
    
    >What is wrong with knowing all there is to know about the man??
    
    Nothing.  But what's the point?
    
    MLK is honored for his political achievements.  If this hidden
    information, whatever it is, pertains to his political achievements,
    then it is relevant to determining what recognition his achievements
    merit.  If this information does not pertain to his political
    achievements, it is irrelevant, and you do not need any more
    information to decide whether MLK is worthy or not.
    
    >Why do we have to wait 50 years? Is it because human nature by that 
    >time will forget and MLK will be too god-like for any of it to matter???
    
    On the contrary.  The more god-like he is, the more risk in releasing
    information that damages that view, because it will produce a stronger
    reaction.  Either that, or the information implicates people in various
    undesirable activities, and the screening authority didn't want those
    people prosecuted....

    Veterans Day...
    
    4th of July...
    
    Christmas...
    
    That's ALL!

    <<< Note 252.47 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>

    
>    Christmas...

Is Christmas a national holiday? If it is, it shouldn't be. And I'm a 
Christian.

    
    RE: .46
    
    >You have said you haven't decided if he was worthy.
    
     You forgot (conveniently?) to include what the worthiness was all
    about Chels... Worthy of respect, recognition of his achievements, of
    his place in history for his civil rights work and stand? Yes (but you
    knew that...) Worthy of a national holiday? No...
    
      We have (rightly) a President's Day and N.H. (rightly) has a Civil
    Rights Day... I believe the man (MLK) would have heartily approved of
    both...
    
    
     As for what's hidden?
    
    How about I put some convoluted spin on it myself...
    
     What if the records showed he was a pedophile? Or a spousal and/or
    child abuser? Or that he embezzled many dollars from civil rights
    organizations? That wouldn't be a big deal?
    
      As for "political achievements"... everyone today who aspires to
    those political achievements or ambitions is under the micro-scope for
    almost everything and anything (and I'm not saying that's right by any
    means) and the world/press/people make it an issue if/when something
    crops up. Why should this be any different because the man is dead and
    or lionized?
    
     

    Yes, but Christmas has an entirely different meaning now.  Most people
    could care less that Jesus was born.  Christmas is about presents and
    Santa Claus!!!
    
    _Jack

    Re: .49
    
    >You forgot (conveniently?) to include what the worthiness was all
    >about Chels
    
    Not at all.  I stated that he was honored for his political
    achievements.  Those are the same grounds for honoring Washington and
    Jefferson, after all.  
    
    >Worthy of a national holiday? No...
    
    Ah, so you _have_ said he isn't worthy.  Then what's all this yelling
    about needing to see hidden information before you decide.
    
    >I believe the man (MLK) would have heartily approved of both...
    
    Is that based on history or legend?  And don't you want to examine that
    hidden information before you take a stance?
    
    >That wouldn't be a big deal?
    
    Except for embezzling, they wouldn't affect his political achievements. 
    Washington and Lincoln weren't exactly pure as the driven snow, either.
    
    >Why should this be any different because the man is dead and or 
    >lionized?
    
    It isn't.  Note I have never said you shouldn't have read the
    information.  What I have examined is whether the information is
    relevant to any decision you wanted to make about his worthiness.  
    Only now it appears you have made the decision, so I don't know why
    we need to continue.

    
    RE: those complaining about the MLK holiday...
    
    Digital had the right idea: A PERSONAL HOLIDAY.
    
    If you want to honor Dr. King... take a PERSONAL HOLIDAY from work
    
    Else... go to work on 16 January and forget about it.
    
    However, PLEASE, DO NOT TRY TO IMPOSE YOUR VIEWS ON THE REST OF US.
    
    Look around, there are BAD prescedents throughout history...!!

    The issue of the sealed records/investigations of MLK have got to 
    contain some derogatory materials that would destroy his present image. 
    Why else would they be sealed for 50 years? From all I have read of his
    writings MLK himself would probably be opposed to his birthday as a
    holiday. He never considered himself more than an ordinary man in
    anyway. He tried to live what he preached. His "I Have A Dream" speech
    is probably the best speech given since Eisenhower's "Military
    Industrial Complex" speech. As for his "other women", it apparently
    didn't bother or worry his wife too much although with today's media,
    they would have smeared him all over the news. Same with JFK. They were
    fortunate that the times being what they were the media overlooked all
    their screwing around on their wives. The files should be opened to 
    clear up the innuendoes/implications that the sealing of the files, has
    raised since it was done. Is truth to be feared? Write your congressman
    today and demand they be opened so we can settle the issue once and for
    all. From what I have seen in here so far, I would guess many of you
    are terrified of what is in those sealed records.(IMHO)
    

	actually, both washington and lincoln might feel the same way as you
feel mlk would about their birthdays being celebrated. but we'll never know.


Glen

re .22

I am presently sitting about 15 feet from Mike, not enjoying my location 
choice holiday here at ALF.  It's pretty amazing that the site services
folks chose this as a location choice holiday considering we support
customers in all of North America, and in some cases worldwide.  Last
year we had a treacherous ice storm on MLK day and I almost wrecked my 
car a couple of times trying to get in.  So by having this day as location
choice holiday, I am getting a day off I can never take.  

Happy 60th Elvis!

Paul

    Good to see all the nice conversation that I started with this topic.
    :-)
    
    MY views:
    
    NH has the right idea - Civil Rights Day - to celebrate the people who
    fought for them.
    
    Jesse Jackson is using today as a publicity stunt - to see how popular
    he is.  He also has claimed that the Contract With America will roll
    back the gains in civil rights.  I guess that means that people will
    now not have the right to be welfare recipients.
    
    NAACP has left the legacy of civil rights, unless the person whose
    civil rights in question are liberal.
    
    A parting shot: If you want to celebrate MLK day, do so.  Otherwise,
    leave the rest of us alone.
    
    ME

I don't think they had much choice at ALF.

Not that many years ago, there were serious bomb threats against several
large Atlanta companies which did not declare MLK day to be a holiday.

/john

    
    Well, isn't THAT special 8^/.

    re: .53 on sealed records:
    
    It is also entirely possible that whatever is contained in the sealed
    records would be more of an embarrassment to the goverment and the
    investigating agencies than to MLK and family.  As for MLK day, I do
    think he deserves a national holiday, but would not be opposed to
    a national Civil Rights Holiday, provided that it is a separate day.  
    I think that simply changing the name of the MLK holiday would 
    just smack of euphemism.  It would just be a sop to those who say
    (validly) that other people made as great/greater contributions to
    civil rights (like Susan B...).  
    
    As for President's Day, I'd be overjoyed to see a return of the
    separate Washington and Lincoln celebrations.  First, because each man
    was great in his own way but had little in common with the other, and
    second because I just so happen to have been born on Lincoln's
    Birthday!! :)!
    
    For that matter, why don't we just celebrate Civil Rights Day on 
    Lincoln's Birthday?!  Kill two birds with one stone, and Lincoln
    certainly did much (in his time and way) to improve civil rights...
    
    M.
    
    

    
    of course, in atlanta, we were inundated with the banality of MLK
    celebrations.  though not apparantly widely reported, edwared olmos the
    hispanic actor, said a few words at the gathering at ebenezer church. 
    he finished by saying that "all colors come from black and that
    *nothing* comes from white", to cheers from the audience.  it is really
    sickening to see such racism promoted in the name of one who was made
    famous by his fight against racism.
    
    jeff

    
    Well, he was wrong.  All colours of paint, for example, mixed, make
    black, so he had a point in that if you reversed the mixing process
    you'd be able to get all colours from black.  BUT all colours of *light* 
    mixed make white light, so while all colours may come from black, all 
    light comes from white, and light ain't nothing.
    
    Theatre & Photography Lighting 101 8^).

    
    RE: .60
    
    Sickening is right....
    
    But we should be understanding, seeing as how us white folk drove them,
    throughout the centuries, to make such derogatory remarks, and them
    being victims and all, should account for their bias and bigotry...

    It's hardly ever mentioned now, but MLK's prominence in the civil
    rights movement had been fading for some considerable time prior to
    his murder. 
    
    His assassination gave him a preeminence he might not have had
    otherwise.
    

| <<< Note 252.62 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI "Zebras should be seen and not herd" >>>



| But we should be understanding, seeing as how us white folk drove them,
| throughout the centuries, to make such derogatory remarks, 

	Isn't it true Andy? I say yes and no. White folk have done a lot to
hurt people of colour. But not all white folk. What we all need to do is to
take things on an individual basis. Once that is done, then we can weed out the
white person doing this, black that, Christian this, gay that, Indian this,
etc.. 

| and them being victims and all, should account for their bias and bigotry...

	They should know who it all belongs to.....

 >>   Isn't it true Andy? I say yes and no. White folk have done a lot to
 >>   hurt people of colour. But not all white folk. What we all need to do is 
 >>   to take things on an individual basis. Once that is done, then we can weed
 >>   out the white person doing this, black that, Christian this, gay that, 
 >>   Indian this, etc..
    
    Glen, I hate to harp on this but you know I will anyway.  If we really
    need to take it on an individual basis, then haven't you in fact
    supported my stand on the lack of need for some of our EEOC laws? 
    Hit them all individually and not penalize the whole society!
    
    -Jack

| <<< Note 252.65 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>


| Glen, I hate to harp on this but you know I will anyway.  

	Damn harpie!

| If we really need to take it on an individual basis, then haven't you in fact
| supported my stand on the lack of need for some of our EEOC laws?

	Jack, where did the word some enter into your vocabulary? You have
stated all in the past, but now some. Why?

| Hit them all individually and not penalize the whole society!

	When the country starts looking at people individually, we will be able
to do with the laws completely Jack.


Glen

    And you know it won't ever happen because the poverty pimps would lose
    their constituency and the very social worker types that cause most of
    the inner city problems would be out of a job...
    
    So Long Suckaaaaaaa...ahhhaaa ha ha (Insert cigar in mouth here and
    drive away like the ghost of Christmas past on "Scrooged" with Bill
    Murray)

    <<< Note 252.67 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>

>    And you know it won't ever happen because the poverty pimps would lose
>    their constituency and the very social worker types that cause most of
>    the inner city problems would be out of a job...
    
>    So Long Suckaaaaaaa...ahhhaaa ha ha (Insert cigar in mouth here and
>    drive away like the ghost of Christmas past on "Scrooged" with Bill
>    Murray)

	^------The very soul of reason

    Hey, just because I'm kookoo doesn't change the fact.  
    
    

	You were kookoo enough to miss a key snarf!

re:.60

>it is really sickening to see such racism promoted in the name of
>one who was made famous by his fight against racism.

I agree. But weren't you the one extolling the virtues of "The Bell
Curve" recently? A book that is a dressed-up eugenics philosophy.

    
    Unlike our northern "Live Free or Die" neighbors, I fail to see the
    harm in it.  No, MLK wasn't really much of a saint.  Truth be told,
    Washington wasn't much of a general.  So what ?  I don't like unions,
    but I wouldn't protest Labor Day !
    
    Much ado about nothing.  We all had to work anyways.
    
      bb

    BB:
    
    Because you're setting a prescedent.  Next thing you know womens groups
    will want to have a Margaret Sanger Day!
    
    -Jack

    .71 Nasau::guillermo
    
    I wasn't exactly extolling the virtues of "The Bell Curve".  I did
    recommend it as a source of data and facts, something generally lacking
    in social debate.  
    
    jeff

	Is there meaning associated with *any* holiday anymore?

	MLK day "makes a great ski weekend."  (It was referred to
	in those terms on radio news last evening.)

	Presidents Day is a great time to buy a car.

	Memorial Day is the unofficial start of summer.

	Columbus Day is the weekend for New England's fall foliage.

	If we (society) *really* wanted to keep a traditional,
	meaningful celebration of a day, we wouldn't have turned
	them all into Monday-holiday-3-day-weekends.

    
    Re: .62 SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI 
    
    >> ... But we should be understanding, seeing as how us white folk
    >>     drove them, throughout the centuries, to make such derogatory 
    >>     remarks, and them being victims and all, should account for their 
    >>     bias and bigotry...
    
    Don't you agree that all those complaints of unequal treatment, and
    even those stories about "THEM" ever being slaves are well over
    done..!?! 

    Re: .74
    
    >Next thing you know womens groups will want to have a Margaret 
    >Sanger Day!
    
    I think there are other feminist activists who have greater claim to a
    day in their honor.
    
    MLK Day _has_ set a precedent.  Have you heard any women's groups
    clamoring for a day honoring a feminist activist?  Then it's not likely
    to be a big priority for them, is it?

    Less you want some feminist on a quarter like dollar..... Suzzzzan B on
    a quarter that has a differnt slant on the edge..:)

    
    
    I've been contemplating my approval of a Civil Rights Day...
    
    Now I'm not so sure....
    
    Having to 'honor' the likes of "Rev" Jesse Jackson along with all those
    who really did some good and accomplished much... well, it leaves a bad
    taste in my mouth...
    

    Andy:
    
    Like I said before, Jesse Jackson is a poverty pimp.  Martin Luther
    King didn't really like him yet Jesse was always around for the photo
    ops!
    
    -Jack

    The Rev-er-annnd Jessse Jack-sonnnnn.
    
    ME

RE: 80-83

Jackson may have a major ego problem, not to mention a grating speach 
impediment, but he's does more for the poor in this country - particularly 
the young - in one day then everyone in the 'box will do in they collective 
lifetimes, I reckon. So your opinions of him - which you have every right 
to express - aren't worth the bytes they consume.

    
    <-------
    
    In your humble opinion of course (bytes withstanding)...
    
    
    BTW.... How many times has he visited Rwanda?

  <<< Note 252.84 by SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI "Zebras should be seen and not herd" >>>

    
>    BTW.... How many times has he visited Rwanda?

Gee, I don't know. I guess you won this debate.

    
    
    Jackson has done nothing but serve himself throughout his life.
    
    Holding King when he died?  Remember that?  Been to Heimietown lately?

    Hmmm...Another interesting piece of speculation.  Now let's see, the
    NAACP doesn't want him...Hmmm...he made a wonderful black
    panther...Hmmm....ufff (Insert Butt Heads voice
    here)....Uhhhh....Uhh...uhhhhhhhh.....what did he do?
    
    

    
    RE: .85
    
    Good answer!!! Good answer!!!
    
    RE: .86
    
    
     "HymieTown"...

I never said Jackson's a saint. 

What has he done? We'll he's travelled across the country speaking at 
churches and schools - not campaigning (at least not directly), but 
inspiring. He's reached MILLIONS that way. Inspiring adults to feel pride
where society would have them feel none. Inspiring kids to stay in school, keep
away from drugs, postpone sex, and believe in themselves. 

Sure, people being people, the majority of them loose their inspiration by 
the time they get home. But if only one half of one percent of them clean 
up their act because of Jessie, then ... well you do the arithmetic.

Since you're of a mind to take away the money, food stamps, an most any 
other support for the poor, it kind of raises the value of what Jackson 
delivers, doesn't it?

You jaeckels ought to take a long look at your own resume before you snipe 
at Jackson. 

Tom

    Okay, I'll bite somewhat on what you said about Jackson...and the
    resume part also.  But if Jesse has a bad image, he has nobody to blame
    but himself for the constant victimizing rhetoric he spewed in years
    past...when it wasn't always warranted.
    
    -Jack

    
    
    
    I've known many other black men and women who have done much more 
    than Mr. Jackson for this cause.  They don't wear it on their 
    sleeves either.  They do it because it's the right thing to do.
    And before you going pointing fingers and telling others to check their
    resume, it might behoove you to mind your own house and quit making
    judgement about others who you know absolutely nothing about.
    
    
    
    Mike
       

RE: .89

Sorry Tom,

The only time Jesse Jackson makes news is when he's talking about blacks being
"victims".

Jackson has made some good speeches with lots of things I agree with.  However,
that stuff just "doesn't play" to the media's image of Jackson.

ME

    <<< Note 252.90 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>

>    Okay, I'll bite somewhat on what you said about Jackson...and the
>    resume part also.  But if Jesse has a bad image, he has nobody to blame
>    but himself for the constant victimizing rhetoric he spewed in years
>    past...when it wasn't always warranted.

Thank you, Jack. You're all right for right-wing loony. :^)

Jessie's can be kinda hard to take, even for a left-wing loony like me. But 
there's no getting around the fact that he's done a fair amount of good, 
too. Unless you're so hung up on his political personna, you can't see past 
it.

| <<< Note 252.90 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>



| But if Jesse has a bad image, he has nobody to blame but himself for the 
| constant victimizing rhetoric he spewed in years past...when it wasn't always 
| warranted.

	And yet you say it is the press that has victimized Newt. You're a
piece of work Jack. 


Glen

          <<< Note 252.91 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "Space for rent" >>>

>    I've known many other black men and women who have done much more 
>    than Mr. Jackson for this cause.  They don't wear it on their 

Really? Who? I'm not doubting you, just curious. I'm not nominating him to
the civil rights hall of fame, by the way. I'm just trying to put 'box bile
in perspective. 

>    And before you going pointing fingers and telling others to check their
>    resume, it might behoove you to mind your own house and quit making
>    judgement about others who you know absolutely nothing about.

Good advice. We should all take it. ...and feel free to point out to me 
when and how I'm wrong.    
    
Tom

        <<< Note 252.93 by REFINE::KOMAR "My congressman is a crook" >>>

Judge,

Most of what you see in the media are Jackson's political speaches, not his 
"preaching." And Jessie's political niche is Victim Advocate. It's what 
makes him so unpaletable to the right (and a lot of others, too), but so
popular with the poor. Even in his political stumping, he's got something
valuable to say. I wouldn't vote for the man, but I'm glad he's part of the
debate (just like I'm glad Rush is). 

Tom

    
    
    You ever meet Jesse, Tom?
    
    So, you want me to name these people?  I don't think they did/do it for
    attention and most of them were lowly gas station, janitor types.  No
    $600 suits, but a lot of class and other things money can't buy.  The
    first gentleman I remember who was like this was Mr. Brown.  I was 5
    years old when I left the are, but we went back to the hometown every
    year.  Mr. Brown told kids (didn't matter what race, creed, color, sex,
    etc, etc we were) about life.  About working hard and being happy with
    what you had, about treating people nice.  He also helped people in
    need (little things like carrying groceries for elderly even though he
    was elderly himself).  Always had a kind word and a smile.  He lived
    it.  As I said, there are many more, I'm not going to do a list, but
    this is one example.
    
    
    And regarding your last remark, you're the one who started in on the
    resume bit.  I didn't accuse you or insinuate anything about you as you
    did with the resume comment.
    
    
    Mike
    
    

    Re: .93
    
    >The only time Jesse Jackson makes news is when he's talking about
    >blacks being "victims".
    
    Technically, this still qualifies as talking about blacks as victims,
    but Jesse did make the news when he said that blacks need to address
    the problem of black-on-black crime.

	MLK snarf!

>>    And yet you say it is the press that has victimized Newt.
>>    You're a piece of work Jack.
    
    No, I said that Newt is being over scrutinized and the media is bitter
    because liberal books don't sell...conservative books do.  Even
    Limbaugh, a figure that liberals laugh at, made millions on one of his
    books alone.  
    
    Glen, the root of my pet peeves has always been the rampant hypocrisy
    that goes on in your party.  Jesse Jackson for one has taken FULL
    ADVANTAGE of Reaganomics and other supply side economic opportunities. 
    Jesse Jackson, unlike Dr. King, does not relate to the impoverished,
    the true social victims of society.  All his children attend the finest
    private schools in Washington D.C., and why wouldn't he?  He knows in
    his heart that the public school system in DC is ghastly and dangerous.
    He talks the talk but the only thing he has in common is that he's
    black!  At least Gingrich had nothing to hide.  He said it plain and
    simple...he can't help it if liberal democrats can't write bestsellers!
    
    -Jack

	Mike, usually we agree on almost everything, but I think you're
confusing things here. The people you talked about while you were growing up
did what they could, and spread the good word. Who do you think inspired these
people to do these things? Could have been almost anyone. Could have been a
friend, relative, their own views made public, MLK, MalcomX, Jessie, anyone.
The whole point that I am making is that those who speak out to the largest
groups will be the ones who get put under the most scruiteny. Jessie's message
can be very moving, and while he ain't no saint, I hardly believe that at 5 you
could have known Mr. Brown was one or not. I think that's something you need to
look at.


Glen

    
    Well, This was before MLK, Malcom, Jessie or any of them.  I don't
    know, haven't you heard that kids are fairly good judges of character? 
    What been said about talking the talk and not walking the walk speaks
    volumes.  
    
    Mike
    

| <<< Note 252.101 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>

| >>    And yet you say it is the press that has victimized Newt.
| >>    You're a piece of work Jack.

| No, I said that Newt is being over scrutinized and the media is bitter
| because liberal books don't sell...conservative books do.  

	Jack, Newt has been under scrutiny for much more than his book. The
book is his recent dealing. Try again.

| Glen, the root of my pet peeves has always been the rampant hypocrisy that 
| goes on in your party.  

	Jack, what is my party?

| Jesse Jackson, unlike Dr. King, does not relate to the impoverished, the true 
| social victims of society.  

	Ok Jack, I want you to prove this claim. I seriously do not think you
can.

| All his children attend the finest private schools in Washington D.C., and why
| wouldn't he?  He knows in his heart that the public school system in DC is 
| ghastly and dangerous.

	You really are funny Jack. You talk about how we don't need welfare,
that we can work our way up to a better life. You give us numerous examples of
your life. Now here is a guy who can afford to send his kids to a private
school, one that might actually be safer, and you complain that he isn't
sending his kids to a school that you call dangerous. Well I for one appluad
the man for not using his kids in a dangerous situation to try and prove a
point! You really make less and less sense each time you place a note in here
Jack. You are sounding VERY hypocritical.

| He talks the talk but the only thing he has in common is that he's black! 

	Let's see, he has made money, so he isn't on welfare, and can support
his family, and this is bad, cause he isn't sending his kids to dangerous
schools, like the rest of the poor black people do. Do you think if others
could send their kids to other schools that they wouldn't Jack? Come on! 

| At least Gingrich had nothing to hide.  

	Which is why he won't discuss what really happened during his divorce,
or if he called Hillary a bitch....


Glen

| <<< Note 252.103 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "Space for rent" >>>




| Well, This was before MLK, Malcom, Jessie or any of them.  I don't
| know, haven't you heard that kids are fairly good judges of character?

	And if todays kids think that Jessie is a good guy, would that change
your view? Of course that might mean you aren't a good judge of character.

| What been said about talking the talk and not walking the walk speaks volumes.

	If it were only accurate ....

    
    
    Well, my personal experience with Jesse says it's accurate.  Wasn't any
    big deal, but it spoke volumes to me.
    

          <<< Note 252.106 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "Space for rent" >>>

    
    
>    Well, my personal experience with Jesse says it's accurate.  Wasn't any
>    big deal, but it spoke volumes to me.

Tell us about it, Mike.

You wave off everything Jessie does that isn't campaigning as if it means 
nothing. Sounds like political sour grapes to me. But maybe the story you 
have to tell will prove othrwise...    

| <<< Note 252.106 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "Space for rent" >>>



| Well, my personal experience with Jesse says it's accurate.  Wasn't any
| big deal, but it spoke volumes to me.

	Well that's fine Mike. But it does shoot your, "kids being a good judge 
of character" theory to hell. So just how was Mr. Brown???? It comes down to 
you really don't know, do you?


Glen

    <<< Note 252.101 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>

>    No, I said that Newt is being over scrutinized and the media is bitter
>    because liberal books don't sell...conservative books do.  Even
>    Limbaugh, a figure that liberals laugh at, made millions on one of his
>    books alone.  

Jack, Jack, Jack. You really are funny. NOw the liberal media's motive is 
the right's book selling ability. 
    
>    that goes on in your party.  Jesse Jackson for one has taken FULL
>    ADVANTAGE of Reaganomics and other supply side economic opportunities. 

You'd think Reagan invented money.

>    Jesse Jackson, unlike Dr. King, does not relate to the impoverished,
>    the true social victims of society.  All his children attend the finest
>    private schools in Washington D.C., and why wouldn't he?  He knows in

He'd be NUTS to send his kids to public schools. Any conspicuous public 
figure would be endangering their children for the sake of political points 
to send them to a public school. It's not the enherent danger of PS, its 
that their children would be sitting ducks for any fanatic who wanted to 
use them to get to him.

If Jessie is living fairly high off the hog, so what? It's not as though 
he's pulling a Jimmie Baker. Jeez, you mean personal poverty is a 
prerequisite to being as an advocate for the poor? They're already too hard 
to come by.

    .If Jessie is living fairly high off the hog, so what? 
    
     It just makes for interesting juxtapositions, like when he talked
    about "we oppressed, poverty stricken african-americans" in a suit that
    costs as much as my whole wardrobe.
    
     personally, I think the man is as racist as the other Jesse, you know,
    the one from Noath Carolinah.

    
    
    Yeah I do, Glen.  He was an upstanding member of the community in the
    eyes of the children and the adults in the neighborhood.
    
    George,
    
    As I said, it wasn't any big deal.  He didn't have much use for me
    being a white person is all.
    
    
    
    
    
    Mike

          <<< Note 252.111 by GRANPA::MWANNEMACHER "Space for rent" >>>

>    George,
    
>    As I said, it wasn't any big deal.  He didn't have much use for me
>    being a white person is all.

God, I gotta take a sabatical! Mike's confusing me with George now.

I wouldn't take it personally, Mike. Jessie probably doesn't have much use 
for of us commoners on a one-on-one basis. Big egos are a common among 
those adored by the public (or some fair number thereof). We all have are 
gifts and are flaws. Some can relate to the crowd, but not anyone within 
it.  Maybe Jackson's one of those. If he were using his oratory skills 
strictly to line his pockets and gain political power, that would be one 
thing. But he does a lot of behind the scenes stuff that DOES do some good, 
and for a lot of people.     
    
Tom (not George)

    Sorry Glen...I keep associating you with liberal dems but I keep
    forgetting, you voted for Bill Weld..However, your vote for Kennedy
    rules out any reason you might have had!  :-)
    
    >>>>You'd think Reagan invented money.
    
    No, but the way you speak, he invented every single fiscal problem the
    United States is facing...you know 12 years of blah blah blah!!!
    
    I have absolutely no problem with Jesse Jackson living high off the
    hog.  I happen to believe he's a poverty pimp though, and he very much
    needs his constituency where they are...poor and miserable.  Otherwise,
    he has no power base!   
    
    -Jqck

    
    
    Sorry about that Tom, the confusion thing.  He acknowledged the other
    two people I was with (who were black).  

    ]We all have are gifts and are flaws.
    
     cringe.

          <<< Note 252.115 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice" >>>

>    ]We all have are gifts and are flaws.
    
>     cringe.

I know. Jeez the brain goes down hill fast after 40. fun with funetics...

    Jessie always struck me as an opportunist, still does.

| <<< Note 252.113 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>

| Sorry Glen...I keep associating you with liberal dems but I keep forgetting, 
| you voted for Bill Weld..However, your vote for Kennedy rules out any reason 
| you might have had!  :-)

	Uhhhh.... I voted for who I thought was the best candidate maybe??? Now
there is a novel concept. 

	Now, will you be addressing the other points in .104 or will you skip
the hard part? 


Glen

re:.75

Well I trust that "general lack" you so cavalierly toss my way is done with a
liberal (but who am I kidding) interpretation, for as I'm about to show
Mr. Andy Krawiecki (SOLVIT::KRAWIECKI) in another note, 'facts' can be both
subjective and objective.

And my point for citing that book vs. your observation of Mr. Olmos' comments
is that very often such comments source from the polarity of people's regard
for each other. It does not have to be understood as in accepted, it should be
understood as in deduced. So, don't be surprised.

Personally I think the MLK day was instituted as placation measure, for there
have been so many who have gone into making this country what it is in so
many areas; from Crispus Attucks to A. Phillip Randolph, and most of those
contributions from a disenfranchised, segregated and yes VICTIMIZED 
community, that it was about time some official historical recognition took
place.

    All I can say about MLK days is....
    
    
    It made for an easy morning commute to O'Hara airport monday morning
    from the suburbs of Chicago.

    RE: .97
    
    	Jackson is a "victim advocate".  However, IMHO, he is wrong about
    how to be an advocate for the poor.  I believe that the poor should be
    forced and/or taught how to be self-sufficient so that they don't have
    to rely on government.  I don't think I've ever heard Jackson say
    that,
    
    	As for some of the things he says in his "preaching", I agree with
    some of the things he says and wish that those things were brought out
    by the media.
    
    ME

          <<< Note 252.125 by WAHOO::LEVESQUE "luxure et supplice" >>>

This whole nature/nurture/intelligence thing is sort of a Burmuda Triangle of 
intellectual and social discourse. It seems everyone's "instruments" go 
bonkers whenever we enter into its vortex. I prejudice doesn't pull us 
down, then fear will. One problem is that a couple of times in the past 100 
years or so, people have used bogus data and scientific theory about n/n/i 
to justify persecution of races and cultures. Is it any wonder the knee's 
flinch?

Like I said, I gotta read this thing.

By the way, this may be one for the TTWA topic: How did it take so long for 
the "Bell Curve" to get its own string? I thought of starting one back when 
this whole thing broke, but I was new to the 'box and felt reticent about 
it. Then I forgot. Now, it amazes me that no one in the 'box seized this 
highly contentious bit of current events.

>>	Jack, Newt has been under scrutiny for much more than his book. The
>>      book is his recent dealing. Try again.

Glen, get real...it's your slimer against my slimer.  It's just that my crook
follows my ideologies better than your crook does.  Divorced wives...Jennifer 
Flowers...the whole thing is moot!!!

| Jesse Jackson, unlike Dr. King, does not relate to the impoverished, the true 
| social victims of society.  

>>	Ok Jack, I want you to prove this claim. I seriously do not think you
>>      can.

Glen, Jesse Jackson is an opportunist.  Jesse Jackson doesn't even do a fasting
right!  Proof is quite easy Glen, the guy has never been without!

| All his children attend the finest private schools in Washington D.C., and why
| wouldn't he?  He knows in his heart that the public school system in DC is 
| ghastly and dangerous.

>>	You really are funny Jack. You talk about how we don't need welfare,
>>that we can work our way up to a better life. 

Glen, your personal, "Nobody Wants a Charlie in the Box" was quite indicative
of your attitude toward America.  We can work our way up to a better life...
you need to lose the defeatist attitude.  But I would really like to address
the first point.  I didn't say that we don't need welfare.  On the contrary.  
What I've stated over and over is that welfare needs to be gutted and needs
tailoring to incent young teenagers toward self sufficiency...finishing school,
acquiring a job...all those things that your current system is failing 
miserably in!!

>>You give us numerous examples of
>>your life. Now here is a guy who can afford to send his kids to a private
>>school, one that might actually be safer, and you complain that he isn't
>>sending his kids to a school that you call dangerous. 

No, I applaud the man for doing this.  So why isn't he out there lobbying for 
the privatization of schools.  Giving his constituents what he knows works!?
 
| He talks the talk but the only thing he has in common is that he's black! 

>>	Let's see, he has made money, so he isn't on welfare, and can support
>>his family, and this is bad, cause he isn't sending his kids to dangerous
>>schools, like the rest of the poor black people do. Do you think if others
>>could send their kids to other schools that they wouldn't Jack? Come on! 

Read above.  Jesse Jackson needs the poor for his power base.  He'll only go
so far until his constituents start acting self sufficient.  

| At least Gingrich had nothing to hide.  

>>	Which is why he won't discuss what really happened during his divorce,
>>      or if he called Hillary a bitch....

Who cares what happened with his divorce and everybody has an opinion about 
Hillary Clinton.  Don't even try to put this in league with Clintons
baggage!

-Jack

    
    RE: .120
    
    Brandon,
    
     You don't have to call me "Mr. Andy Krawiecki"...
    
     "Sir" will do just fine...
    
    
      :)
    

| <<< Note 252.125 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN "I lied; I hate the fat dinosaur" >>>


| Glen, get real...it's your slimer against my slimer.  It's just that my crook
| follows my ideologies better than your crook does.  Divorced wives...Jennifer
| Flowers...the whole thing is moot!!!

	Jack, the whole thing is not moot when you bring up he's under
scrutiny. You opened the door for it Jack, and now you try to close it. Why?

| | Jesse Jackson, unlike Dr. King, does not relate to the impoverished, the true
| | social victims of society.

| >>	Ok Jack, I want you to prove this claim. I seriously do not think you
| >>      can.

| Glen, Jesse Jackson is an opportunist. Jesse Jackson doesn't even do a fasting
| right!  Proof is quite easy Glen, the guy has never been without!

	Jack, you keep making claims to back your origional claim. Now take all
of your claims and prove them. Here is a hint, to prove a claim it is not wise
to bring up other claims. You need to show proof.

| >>	You really are funny Jack. You talk about how we don't need welfare,
| >>that we can work our way up to a better life.

| Glen, your personal, "Nobody Wants a Charlie in the Box" was quite indicative
| of your attitude toward America. We can work our way up to a better life...
| you need to lose the defeatist attitude.  

	HAAAAA!!!! Ohhhh Jack.... are you gonna feel like you've just been
kicked!!!! What time of the year did that personal name appear? Christmas time.
Why was it there? It was a line from Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer. Remember
the island of misfit toys? Remember the Charlie in the box???? That appears
every year at Christmas time. I remember the 1st time I heard that as a kid it
made me laugh real hard. It was always my favorite line in the movie because of
that. I sometimes wonder about you Jack. So my personal name is indicative of my
attitude towards America? Really, it might be better for you to ask about and 
not assert your views of others. Of course then we couldn't have as much fun....
heh heh.... I do hope you take the time to comment on this Jack, as I seriously 
don't think of America as being stuck in Rudolph's tv special....

| What I've stated over and over is that welfare needs to be gutted and needs
| tailoring to incent young teenagers toward self sufficiency...finishing school,
| acquiring a job...all those things that your current system is failing
| miserably in!!

	Jack, denying them benefits is not going to get them to stop having
sex. Do you honestly believe that a teenager is thinking about welfare when
they have sex?

| >>You give us numerous examples of your life. Now here is a guy who can afford
| >>to send his kids to a private school, one that might actually be safer, and 
| >>you complain that he isn't sending his kids to a school that you call 
| >>dangerous.

| No, I applaud the man for doing this.  

	Sounds to me like you're bitchin about it.

| So why isn't he out there lobbying for the privatization of schools.  

	Maybe that is not what he believes in? Maybe he wants the poor to be
able to get good schooling without having to pay extra for it? Maybe when he
talks about having to clean up the schools, he means just that? Maybe, just
maybe, he views the public schools as a good idea, but one that needs to be
improved upon. You might want to ask him what he means, and not assert it for
him.

| Giving his constituents what he knows works!?

	Jack, it may have been better for him because of the school system is
real bad. It doesn't mean that after it's cleaned up it can't work. You've got
this view, it seems, and hopefully you'll correct me if I am wrong, that if
someone sends their kid to a private school, that automatically means that they
think the public school system blows to high heaven! If one wants their
children to get a better education than a public school can offer, and they
have the money to do so, then send your kid out. I call that being a
responsible parent.

| Read above.  Jesse Jackson needs the poor for his power base.  He'll only go
| so far until his constituents start acting self sufficient.

	Again Jack, you need to show proof of this. 

| | At least Gingrich had nothing to hide.

| >>	Which is why he won't discuss what really happened during his divorce,
| >>      or if he called Hillary a bitch....

| Who cares what happened with his divorce and everybody has an opinion about
| Hillary Clinton.  Don't even try to put this in league with Clintons
| baggage!

	No Jack, I am putting it in to show you that your man Newt does have
things to hide. 

Glen

>You don't have to call me "Mr. Andy Krawiecki"...
> "Sir" will do just fine...


...and they say they don't want to "roll back the clock"...

I'll stick with 'Andy'. It reinforces my discipline. ;-)
    

    RE: private schools and Jesse Jackson
    
    	Does he favor vouchers for parents to send their kids to either a
    private OR a public school?
    
    	Question: If you had your choice to send your kids to a private or
    public school, which would you choose?
    
    ME

    Didn't even have to ponder that one...private without a doubt.
    
    Not only that, it has to be a school where the child is accountable for
    his/her behavior.  Furthermore, the government cannot have any control
    on what is taught...provided the children meet or exceed the standards
    prescribed by the local school board on math and sciences.
    
    -Jack

    How does Jesse Jackson get away with running for office and still using
    the Reverend title? The media were all over Pat Robertson's back with
    his religious views but the REVEREND Jesse rolls on with no one asking
    that question. Separation of church and state applies to him as well as
    it does to Pat Robertson. This man makes a living out of running for
    office and hoping like hell he doesn't win. That is why he ducked
    running for mayor of DC. Would have won easily but, if that had
    happened, then he would have been on the spot to prove all he promises,
    to prove he has the answers. As to his having his kids in private
    schools - that's expected. Like all the congress critters who ship
    their kids off to private schools and talk about the so-called "white
    flight" from the inner city schools and try to make people feel guilty
    for doing so. Jesse can take a big suck pill and blow away.

	re: -.1


	Tell us what you really mean!!!!


Glen

                      <<< Note 252.131 by SECOP2::CLARK >>>
                             -< Hope I don't win >-

The difference between Pat Robertson and Jessie is that one ran for office 
BASED on his riligious preachings with the avowed intent to make at least 
some of his religious doctrine the law of the land, while the other is a 
man who ran for office based on his political phylosophy and popularity 
gained through his prominence in a secular organization who also happened 
to be a preacher. Can you tell which is which?

As to Jackson's apparent aversion to holding office, you're probably right. 
If he's smart. He's a strong motivator, but doubt he would make a good 
administrator/manager.