[Ct-nfb] Can you stop using this forum for your personal opinionsand negativity

Sat Nov 10 14:55:54 UTC 2012

Hi Everyone,
I am not sorry that I posed my questions as that is the only way to learn
and that I surely have done. Thanks to all who provided this information on
two organizations I was not familiar with. I am still a new NFB member so I
am soaking it all in.

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Edward <personal.edward at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello
>
> While the negativity is not constructive, discussion of the ACB, or any
> other organization that relates to blindness, should be aloud to continue
> on
> the list.  I believe the list should be used to talk about any subject
> relating to blindness, as long as it's appropriate for all ages to read,
> and
> until such time   that the list's traffic becomes too convoluted.  It's not
> like the list has been inundated with responses, or has been too difficult
> to follow.
>
> Just my opinion,
> Edward
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ct-nfb [mailto:ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Sandee Kush
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 5:50 PM
> To: 'NFB of Connecticut Mailing List'
> Subject: [Ct-nfb] Can you stop using this forum for your personal
> opinionsand negativity
>
> Those of you having the ACB discussion relative to the  HR, would it be
> possible for you to 1,  Develop a group email to converse back and forth?
> 2.  Once again, email the person directly that  you want to debate or
> whatever 3.  Create a blog
>
> I am sure I speak for many of those on the list serve.  Personally, I am
> revising my opinion of people based on their comments, developing concern
> about leadership skills and just plain bewildered that anyone thinks this
> is
> a constructive dialogue.
>
> Please do not respond to me on the List serve.
> And please...stop the "public" debate.
> Thank you.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ct-nfb [mailto:ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of ntwales
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 12:19 PM
> To: ct-nfb at nfbnet.org
> Subject: Re: [Ct-nfb] FW: ACB Resolution on H.R. 3086
>
> Rich - Thank you for your excellent message.
> Chris - I couldn't disagree with you more on several points.  First,
> though,
> I should state that, like Justin, I too received a national scholarship
> from
> ACB while an undergrad and attended their national convention.  I did meet
> many pleasant, articulate, and successful members there--and most were
> pleasant and welcoming to me even though they knew clearly that I was an
> NFB
> member.  I spoke a couple of months later with President Maurer about this,
> and he was glad I went, and he showed no animosoty towards the ACB during
> our conversation.  Also before moving to Connecticut, as an NFB leader in
> California I worked closely with ACB leaders on a handful of joint issues,
> including establishing a separate rehabilitation agency for the blind and
> increasing availability of public transit, and I found everyone pleasant to
> work with and, on other matters such as the level of access to public
> rights
> of way, pleasant to disagree with.  Now:
> 1. You wrote, "I've met people at national convention who are members of
> both NFB and ACB--although Dr. Maurer [you gave him the title doctor; he
> himself does not and I endeavor not to; his brother interestingly enough
> holds a doctorate] would certainly excommunicate them if he found out."
> While President Maurer would support excommunicating these dual members, it
> isn't about him.  The NFB constitution forbids such dual membership.  This
> is an organizational constitutional matter, and I think most members would
> agree that, just like you can't be registered as a Republican and a
> Democrat, you can't be a dual member--and, as we practiced at our state
> convention, our NFB could vote to change that about our constitution if we
> ever changed our minds.
> 2. You wrote, "ACB's decision not to support HR 3086 is hardly comparable
> to
> Hitler gassing the Jews or the English exterminating Native Americans."
> While Hitler gasing the Jews (he also gased the
> disabled) and the English killing Native Americans on their face seem like
> extreme examples, they are both predicated upon the same belief that some
> human life is less valuable than other human life.  ACB deliberating to be
> silent is more properly comparable to those in Nazi Germany who remained
> silent while the Holocaust went on around them, while trains and marches of
> prisoners passed their towns and woods and churches.  How Nazi Germany rose
> to such power personally fascinates me, and maybe we've heard a small
> insight into how.  Who will be left to stand up for the ACB...
> 3. You mention the statistic that few blind people are paid less than the
> minimum wage under the infamous Section 14(c).  This is a tired argument,
> and with Rich's public admission I now know of three NFB of CT leaders who
> were devalued by this provision.  And it's not just Goodwill, of course,
> like Semens and Phillips weren't the only users of concentration camp labor
> in Nazi Germany, but they are the worst--they'd have you think they're a
> charity!  The other two NFB of CT members were devalued at shops not
> affiliated with Goodwill.  Knowing so many blind people who have been
> devalued by this provision, in the context of this clip from the ACB
> convention I, as a thoughtful Republican and regular viewer of Fox News (I
> knew it was over when they called it for Obama!), will never think of the
> 99% and the 1% the same way again...
> Best,
> Nathanael
>
> On 09.11.2012 11:03, Richard McGaffin wrote:
> > --- On wrote:
> >
> >> From: Chris Kuell <ckuell at comcast.net>
> >> Subject: Re: [Ct-nfb] FW: ACB Resolution on H.R. 3086
> >> To: "NFB of Connecticut Mailing List" <ct-nfb at nfbnet.org>
> >> Date: Friday, November 9, 2012, 8:33 AM
> >>
> >> I know many ACB members who are capable, competent blind people.
> >> They believe in independence, Braille, and the right of all blind
> >> people to become active members in the workplace and society. Marcia
> >> dresser, who used to live in Connecticut and was the first VP of the
> >> ACB here, worked with us to help pass a Braille bill back in 1999. I
> >> was on several BESB committees with her, and I admire Marcia and her
> >> husband Steve, also blind and an active ACB member, very much. I've
> >> met people at national convention who are members of both NFB and
> >> ACB--although Dr. Maurer would certainly excommunicate them if he
> >> found out. Again, these are capable, competent, admirable blind
> >> people, who are networking and not judging people by affiliation, but
> >> rather by character.
> >>
> >> I see the ACB and NFB as completely analogous to republicans and
> >> democrats. Both groups have a vision for our country, but they have
> >> different ideas on how to get there. Neither side is evil, although I
> >> have my doubts about the folks at Fox news, but for some reason,
> >> people get fired up when they feel they have an enemy, which is how
> >> far too many NFBers and ACBers react. I've studied both
> >> organizations, and choose to be an NFB member because I think our
> >> philosophy best matches my own personality. But I don't think the ACB
> >> is wrong, just different. I would summarize this way: The NFB wants
> >> training and opportunities for blind people, while the ACB wants
> >> understanding and accommodations.
> >>
> >> I listened to the ACB audio clip, twice, and I find it fascinating
> >> how different people react to the same stimuli. I didn't hear any
> >> slamming of the NFB, I just heard a single sentence saying 'it's an
> >> NFB bill'. The sentence wasn't said with love or enthusiasm, and in
> >> fact probably held a little disdain, but I certainly wouldn't call it
> >> slamming.
> >>
> >> ACB's decision not to support HR 3086 is hardly comparable to Hitler
> >> gassing the Jews or the English exterminating Native Americans. It's
> >> a decision based on facts, math, and mission. NIB doesn't pay blind
> >> workers below minimum wage. Good will does, but by my
> >> calculation,it's very few blind people. The large majority of the few
> >> hundred disabled workers who receive below minimum wage are
> >> multi-disabled, almost all with severe cognitive disabilities. And
> >> the small percentage of blind people who are included in this class
> >> are also multi-disabled, with blindness the least of their troubles.
> >> Traditionally, the NFB has not fought on behalf of other
> >> disabilities, and DR. Maurer himself told me personally that 'it
> >> dilutes our message'. The NFB has decided to fight on behalf of
> >> people with other disabilities in taking on HR 3086, while the ACB
> >> has decided that they won't. It's not evil, it's simply a different
> >> viewpoint.
> >>
> >> Deb, are you sorry you asked? Smile.
> >>
> >> chris
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Ct-nfb mailing list
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> >> Ct-nfb:
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ct-nfb mailing list
> Ct-nfb at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Ct-nfb:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/slkush93%40att.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ct-nfb mailing list
> Ct-nfb at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Ct-nfb:
>
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/personal.edward%40gmail.
> com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/personal.edward%40gmail.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ct-nfb mailing list
> Ct-nfb at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Ct-nfb:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/deb.reed57%40gmail.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/attachments/20121110/691a8359/attachment.html>