[statecom-discuss] [candidate-development] Fwd: calling lists?GRP communications?

[Betty H. Zisk]

Merilice--I take heart from your message and your positive thoughts. And
indeed I do sense a positive change in the tone of the last two meetings (I
wade through the minutes and the reactions to those mtgs.) Perhaps I should
just heed the advice of my close friend and mentor of yore, John
Rensenbrink, who insisted that we were in it for the long haul. I wld like
to return to my previous activism at Statecom. Unfortunately that isnt
possible right now. Going to places like Worchester and Fitchburg for a six
hour meeting just wear me out. I am so happy that a younger generation of
GRP has that energy and I pray that they will continue the work. And I
continue to hope that with enough pulmonary exercise done faithfully that I
will be able once again to take part in those meetings: I have high hopes. I
am a lot better. But not enough for my former pace.

I was only trying to provoke a discussion about the sad state (as I see it)
of GRP in MA. And to make a plea to Mike and John and others to LET GO of
their divisive issues. To accept the judgement of the statecom and adcom on
some major pts about candidate eligibility even if they dont agree. I have
received an e mail from Mike that says basically that he intends to go on
with his witness to Nader's lack of eligibility. That is the only response
so far. Sobeit. The rest of you are horribly busy until superTuesday. I
continue to love and respect you--and to support you insofar as I can
without holding any office in the GRP. Betts Zisk



-----Original Message-----
From: statecom-discuss-bounces at green-rainbow.org
[mailto:statecom-discuss-bounces at green-rainbow.org]On Behalf Of Merelice
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 2:21 AM
To: candidate development; Green-Rainbow Party (GRP) Administrative
Committee; Discussion List for StateCom members
Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] [candidate-development] Fwd: calling
lists?GRP communications?


Betts,

In light of what you have witnessed in emails, I'm not surprised you
are disaffected.

But if you had been able to attend the last two StateCom meetings, I
think you would be greatly reassured. Both meetings had
well-above-quorum attendance (up to 25). Both meetings welcomed new
members from parts of the state that haven't been represented. Both
meetings by and large exhibited respectful behavior and listening. And
most important, both meetings passed proposals of real substance and
exciting possibilities. If/When you receive your newsletter, you will
read about some of the actions taken.

So take heart, dear heart. This, too, will pass.

Merelice



On 1/31/08, Betty H. Zisk <zisk at bu.edu> wrote:
> I am asking Merelice to post this statement since I dont think I have
>  posting rights on statecom list. I will try very hard to be brief. I have
>  been one of the members of long standing (since 1986)who is no longer on
>  Statecom but who has followed the debates and minutes and reports
intensely.
>  I am still a registered Green and intend to vote on Tues. But I am deeply
>  ASHAMED of my party. My party with whom I fell in love before it even
gained
>  party status. And I fear I transmit this shame to my students just by
>  avoiding all discussion of GRP. Not last semester when I mentioned the
fact
>  that I was a GRP member and was proud of our local candidates and urged
them
>  to be active. But this semester when I receive an extraordinary number of
>  calls from students who have journalism assignments about the election (I
>  think I have received over 20 calls from not just my students but from
other
>  colleges--I guess due to my  BU web site which lists parties). I have
>  avoided any mention of late of GRP or Greens US or third parties. Yes
this
>  would be an ideal time to mention GRP. Why dont I do it? Ask yourselves
this
>  question: why should ANYONE vote Green -Rainbow except for hopes of
change
>  in the long haul? And then ask yourself if voting GRP is really a hope
for
>  change. Really--being honest.
>
>  I am not formally leaving or resigning. But I will probably vote for
Obama
>  if nominated.  Why? Because at least in Mass this is a party of
confusion,
>  of dissent, of disarray. We never spoke with one voice (and indeed we
>  welcomed dissent) but we were never so disrespectful and dogged in our
>  opinions, at least in my experience as we are at present. I cite just two
>  examples: Mike H. who simply cant let go of the legalties of Nader on the
>  ballot, and John who simply cant let go of anything,and who has a
>  conspritorial view of our own process. My personal views of who is right
or
>  wrong on Nader issue isnt the pt. My pt is that I am ashamed of this
debate.
>  It has descended into levels that remind me of the ideological debate in
the
>  late 1980s between the Bookchin and Spretnak wings of the movement: that
>  particular debate led to the split in the Greens that continued for some
>  years with disastrous effects. I continue to have a dim faith. I care.
But I
>  am massively disaffected. Betts Zisk
>
> -----Original Message-----
>  From: candidate-development-bounces at green-rainbow.org
>  [mailto:candidate-development-bounces at green-rainbow.org]On Behalf
>  Merelice
>  Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:25 PM
>  To: candidate development
>  Cc: Green-Rainbow Party (GRP) Administrative Committee
>  Subject: Re: [candidate-development] Fwd: calling lists? GRP
>  communications?
>
>
>  Please note: I have deleted the two names that John added since this
>  response relates to how the party functions and not to any candidate.
>  Meanwhile, I request that people not escalate an already sensitive
>  situation. Let's prove we can take care of the world by taking care of
>  each other.
>  Merelice
>
>  On 1/31/08, Jamie O'Keefe <jokeefe at jamesokeefe.org> wrote:
>
>  > On Jan 31, 2008 1:09 PM, John Walsh <john.walsh at umassmed.edu> wrote:
>  >  > So I thought.  Is this kind of hesitation what is holding up the
>  >  > distribution of the lists?
>  >
>  > Well it would help if the request got to the right person, either Dan
>  >  or I.  I did mention that the lists are available and what was
>  >  required at Sunday's state com. meeting which you were at.
>
>  It is unrealistic to expect people to know or remember how to request
>  our lists, even when mentioned in passing at a meeting. I find it
>  particularly disturbing to hear that phone calls and emails to the GRP
>  number and address did not get a response from us and/or did not get
>  referred to the appropriate individuals. Such people should get an
>  apology.
>
>  This may be another symptom that too few people are trying to do too
>  much. But responding promptly to those trying to contact the party
>  should get top priority. Otherwise, all the outreach efforts in the
>  world won't succeed in building the party.
>
>  How can we correct this oversight?
>
>  Merelice
_______________________________________________
statecom-discuss mailing list
statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss