Dear Dr. Mike;
Some of Gavin Newsom's pronouncements in office, and Ron Getty's
emails on this list, led me to believe they merited a personal You
wrote in part: invitation to attend the meetings. In addition, you
and Eric are certainly welcome.
UH - Er - which emails merited an invite to the meeting - I don't
recall any particular emails where I mentioned I was a chronic
drinker or a chronic inebriate
although I have been known to get drunk with the message of
Libertarianism and the freedoms I could have by converting the world
to Libertarianism - does that mean I need a 12 step program to
control my urges to drink the power of libertarianism?
If so I don't think I would want to attend - I need to spread the
message of libertarianism - so evryone else can drink deeply of the
freedom and liberty and independence of being a Libertarian. YES YES
YES!!!
Of course on the other hand - Mayor Newson has poppped up quite
often in the news as a "party boy drinker" even when his date was
underage.!!! Talk about corrupting the morals of a minor -
introducing a single young sexy woman to drink and who knows what
will happen next to her when she's alone with Mayor Newsom???
Ron Getty
SF Libertarian
Starchild,
The SMART Recovery meetings (www.ThreeMinuteTherapy.com/SMART.htm)
are open to all, rich and poor alike. The meetings are free to the
public and are attended by many poor people. It's not tax funded. I,
along with a handful of other leaders, are all volunteers.
I agree with Eric that many people who drink are not addicted.
SMART is not for them. We don't force anyone to attend meetings. All
attendees either feel they have an addiction problem or are simply
curious about what a non-12 step meeting is like.
Some of Gavin Newsom's pronouncements in office, and Ron Getty's
emails on this list, led me to believe they merited a personal
invitation to attend the meetings. In addition, you and Eric are
certainly welcome.
Best, Michael
www.ThreeMinuteTherapy.com
From: Starchild
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] SF Examiner Publishes My Anti-Drunk
Campaign LTE
Eric,
I feel you with regard to society's class biases about drinking.
But as far as the LP, the people Michael specifically invited to his
drinking therapy session were Ron Getty and Gavin Newsom -- I don't
think either of them are poor. Not that Michael represents the party
as a whole any more than you do anyway, if you are a Libertarian and
a libertarian. But there is a long and time-honored tradition of
Libertarians saying things like "the problem with Libertarians is
___"... 8) That being said, I too wish the party would focus more on
how the rights of the poor are violated.
Love & liberty,
<<< starchild >>>
I'm all for treatment for those that want it and the gov. doesn't
tax for it. The problem with therapy, is most (or at least many)
drink because that's what they want to do.
Outsiders see a problem with citizens consuming a legal beverages
in ( the Tenderloin) public. But as for at the many festivals in SF
its okay.
Such is a economic double standard. Its as if "y'all" want laws
stating the poor can't drink or play lottery. The poor need LPs more
than anyone. Their rights are taken constantly by so called do
gooders i.e. politicians, social pimps/treatmenters and the
religious. Why require residents of the TL to remain sober in their
jail cell sized rooms 'always and forever'? They aren't allowed in
your neighborhoods, but many of you want to legislate theirs. Oh yeah
and don't forget Native Americans shouldn't alleviate poverty by
having gaming either?
I finding LPs ignore the right violations against the poor. The
country would really take notice if a stand were taken for the poor,
which begins the slippery slope.