re-1: Gary Hubbell dialog


Richard Moore

Bcc: contributors

An open letter to Gary Hubbell
Steve Campbell wrote:
From: Steve Wozniak
Subject: Re: Fw: An open letter to Gary Hubbell
To: “Steve Campbell”
Date: Saturday, April 3, 2010, 2:08 PM

Thank you very much.

I was at Apple back in the days when Woz was there. He was the conscience of the company, whereas Steve Jobs was the promoter. It’s good to see that Woz continues his good-hearted ways.

Brian Hill wrote:
good – I sent it to some of my networks. Let’s hope the two grass roots will hear some of this and respond. I sent it to AlterNet and asked if they would consider carrying efforts to build alliances between the grass roots left and the grass roots right like your letter.

Good work Brian. Any response from Alternet?

Thomas Greco wrote:

Bob Taft considers himself a “real conservative” but he’s against the Constitution.

Yes, it is true that labels are too general, and people’s individual beliefs vary. Does this surprise you?

WellDunn/Tacenda wrote:
EXCELLENT!! THANKS, RICHARD!!! love pen and jim

my pleasure!

Patricia Tursi wrote:
Richard…you are so on target…During the civil rights movement (1960’s) , awareness teach-ins pointed out the use of two sides to split the opposition and gain control…women vs men, rich vs poor, demos vs repubs, black vs white, old vs young….it’s Caeser’s way…divide and conquer.   Oh, and  don’t forget the Monsanto appointees who are now in charge of food and water, as well as other important areas….gasp…there are fresh attacks on raw milk, health advocates (re Greg Caton who was kidnapped from his chosen country in South America…watch out Richard…next they’ll be saying you’re not patriotic! 

If I ever show up on their radar, I’ll ask my friends to help me celebrate. I’d rather die a goat than a sheep. 


Re: Gary Hubbell responds to ‘open letter’
John Lowry wrote:
In brief, liberals believe in live and let live; conservatives believe in live as I live.  Conservatives trust established authority more than liberals and seek to shield people from the eventual disaster they see as deriving from a failure to adhere to the tried and true.  Liberals are less satisfied with the status quo and believe more experimentation is needed to improve the common situation, that “the law” is a work in process and not something rigid, imho.

Spoken like a liberal. I’d say it’s conservatives that believe in live and let live, and liberals, with their ‘political correctness’, who believe in live as I live. I’ve never had a conservative berate me for not going to church, but I’ve gotten lots of complaints from liberals for straying from ‘correctness’. I agree that conservatives do encourage respect for authority, as part of wanting a stable society. However, it is currently conservatives who have been the most active about resisting illegitimate authority and the Patriot Acts.
     As regards liberals not being satisfied with the status quo, that is true — and it is also the lever that enables us to be led down the garden path of ‘good intentions’.

Claudia Woodward-Rice wrote:
Excellent! And his response is so much more focused (than his article) on all the issues shared by the outcasts of the uni-party system.  I really hope to see dialogues such as this grow and have regular web presence because people are hungry for sense and connections. Most of us don’t require others to agree with us 100% of the time and are willing to test and change our ideas rather than continue the stagey partisan stand-off which only benefits oligarchs.
  I’m sending this and your previous comments to a friend and web editor to see what ideas she may have. At the very least we can get these posted at if both you and Gary agree?

Very good Claudia. I hope this comes to fruition. Gary hasn’t responded again, but I’m sure he’d have no objection. He did respond to my open letter with full knowledge that I had posted his initial article, and I’m quite sure he knew I intended to post his response. He’s clearly someone who wants to share his ideas.

Evelyn Goodman wrote:
Well put, Richard.  I hadn’t looked at it in that perspective, but, upon reflection, you make some very good points.
We are being played, one against the other, while the actual ones in power get what they want.
Hmmnnn—–I guess the first step is in the realization, while the next step is, what do we do about it—-those of us who want to see true freedom and caring and respect for one another?
I sent around a ‘blurb’ a short while ago, about forming communes, in which we look out for one another’s needs, which might become a necessity when and if, indeed, disasters come, as predicted in 2012.
Getting back to the basics is what we may have to do, to survive.
  These people with guns, who threaten us with their use, may also be a ploy for us to ask the government to ‘save’ us from them.  (Gad, am I beginning to see ghosts under my bed, now?)
There must be better ways, and we must find them!

It is very refreshing to see someone share their immediate thinking process. That’s really why I write, to encourage people to reconsider their assumptions. Better to confront ghosts than to deny them.


Steve Campbell wrote:
This comment is from one of my email contacts who prefers to remain
Very nicely articulated letter by Mr. Moore.  His grasp of one of the
major fallacies of political thought and effort seems quite firm and it is
heartening to hear it expressed so eloquently.  Keep up the good work!

Thanks for your efforts at cross-list communication.
subscribe mailto:

blog for subscribers:

Prognosis 2012: the elite agenda for social transformation

The Grand Story of Humanity

The Story of Hierarchy

Climate science: observations vs. models

related websites