[candidate-development] [statecom-discuss] Link to the Minority Opinion

[John Walsh]

Mike,
Why do you continue to pester Merelice?
And for whom do you do it?
Our co-chairs are busy, and I am afraid we have reached the point  
where your service to your mistress has deprived you of all credibility.

The GRP is moving on - and you have made your choice,  a bad one.
Please stop haranguing our co-chairs.
john walsh





On Mar 8, 2008, at 5:55 PM, Mike Heichman wrote:

> Hi Merelice,
>
> I find the tone of your letter to be hostile and disrespectful.
>
> In terms of your attempts to place candidates on your ballot before  
> the
> December 6 deadline, I have always been understanding and supportive.
> You and Nat had just been elected co-chairs at the end of August. CDLC
> was not meeting and you were relying on Elie Yarden, who did the  
> bulk of
> the work in making contact with the potential candidates. The state
> legislature had changed the rules and suddenly you lost an entire  
> month
> and had to make decisons before December 6. While I agree with Dan  
> M.'s
> point that you should have consulted with Adcom when you had  
> encoutered
> difficulties, I do not believe that you, Nat and Elie had done nothing
> short of your best efforts to comply with the decisions of the Stte
> Committee and the August Convention.
>
> My understanding is that on December 6 that you only had on hand  
> all of
> the documents from Dr. Mesplay.
>
> I have never made a proposal that said that we should deny  
> delegates to
> everyone who had not complied with all the requrements by December 6!
> The two proposals submitted yesterday say nothing about December 6.  
> Your
> e-mail proposal of February 7 said nothing about December 6. Etc.
>
> Why do you continue bring up December 6? I believe that you are
> attempting to distract everyone from the real issues.
>
> I have not deliberately intended to misinform anyone. The authors  
> of the
> "Minority Report" have attempted to present our viewpoint. The title,
> "Minority Report" by definition acknowledges that there are different
> perspectives.
>
> In terms of your statement that "only a few people have refused to
> accept and are now fomenting unnecessary dissension", that is an  
> insult
> to the members of our party (currently 16 members). The authors of the
> "Minority Report" believe that something serious has gone wrong and we
> are seeking a just remedy. If that is a crime, why does our party  
> exist?
>
> You are the co-chair of our party. Why can't you tolerate dissent?
>
> You were very upset that the letter from Kat Swift ( a member of our
> party who is seeking the Green Party's nomination and has complied  
> with
> all of the requirements) was publicized by Larry Elly. You made it  
> clear
> that you would have preferred to have kept that secret. Kat Swift is a
> party that so far has been harmed by the actions of the leadership of
> the GRP. She has a right to file a complaint and seek redress of her
> grievance. She is seeking a just remedy.
>
> I have never attempted to impose any remedy. I have always said that I
> want to seek a just remedy and have reached out to other members  
> who are
> part of the leadership of the party in search of a remedy.
>
> Using the term "pious" to describe my behavior is disrespectful.
>
> Mike Heichman
>
> Merelice wrote:
>
>> On 3/8/08, Mike Heichman <mikeheichman at verizon.net> wrote:
>> .....
>>
>>
>>> 1. Why are you targeting Congresswoman McKinney in your remarks?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> And why do you continue to ignore the fact that if all the candidates
>> were required to fulfill your interpretation of the rules (an
>> interpretation not shared by those who have been most actively
>> involved in these deliberations), Cynthia McKinney also would not  
>> have
>> been on the ballot? As of the deadline, she had not announced her
>> intention to seek the nomination. So you can offer only two  
>> choices by
>> your set of standards.
>>
>> I do not question the motives of the growing list of signatories. I
>> seriously question the misinformation they have been fed that leads
>> them to think they are supporting an effort based on principle. You
>> cannot deny that they have heard only your side of the story and do
>> not have first-hand knowledge of all the debate and discussions that
>> have led to the conclusions of the majority, conclusions that only a
>> few people have refused to accept and are now fomenting unnecessary
>> dissension.
>>
>> Furthermore, the misinformation has now been fed to and used by a
>> candidate to level charges in a formal complaint against the  
>> Elections
>> Division of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, as well as against
>> party volunteers!
>>
>> Given that long history, why should anyone trust your pious offer to
>> seek resolutions?
>>
>> Merelice
>> _______________________________________________
>> statecom-discuss mailing list
>> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> candidate-development mailing list
> candidate-development at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/candidate-development
>

John V. Walsh, MD
Professor of Physiology
University of Massachusetts Medical School
508-856-3360 (Office)
508-868-1653 (Cell)
john.walsh at umassmed.edu