Responses to WBAI LAB/Rosenberg statement/proposal
- WBAI LAB Affirmative Action statement and proposal
From: Gregory Wonderwheel [ KPFA area]
The resolution message below is patently sausage.
Just like mom, apple pie, and Raymond, everybody in Pacifica loves "affirmative action" Therefore the patriotic call to affirmative action in the first paragraph is fine. Let's be clear, it adds nothing to the discussion which hasn't already been stated over and over again. But fine, let's all salute the flag of affirmative action.
However, just like Bush's false patriotism, it is the second paragraph that exposes the false patriotism of affirmative action proposed by the unity caucus. The claim that people in Pacifica are siding with the Bush administration's anti-affirmative action position is pernicious and false. If you don't support the latest affirmative action brainstorm of the unity caucus then you are against affirmative action and on the side of Bush & Co. This tactic is the same as the Bush administration's claim that if you don't support the war on Iraq and homeland security that you are not a patriot. This free-propaganda-speech shows the level of abject manipulation to which the unity caucus is willing to stoop to snooker people.
It has been over a year and these people are still promising to provide language at the last minute which has not even been vetted by their own group, much less by the WBAI LAB, and much more less by the process that everyone else has had to deal with. Because they obstructed the process over the last year rather than work with it they now find themselves struggling at the last minute to put something in the bylaws that should be in an affirmative action policy plan. The bylaws have a sufficient commitment to diversity and inclusion and let's let the newly elected PNB develop the affirmative action policy and plan to implement the bylaws directive.
From: Carolyn Birden [ WBAI area ]
I cannot help but ask why no one from the Unity Caucus, Bob Lederer, or Mimi Rosenberg, Cerene Roberts, Anthony Mackall, Joe Kaye, or anyone else, has yet listed a specific objection to the current commitments to diversity and inclusion: could it be that they have not read that part of the bylaws, or considered it? Or could it be that this new motion by some of the (quite thoroughly unrepresentative) WBAI LAB members is not meant to address these issues so much as to disrupt the process of passing bylaws that would lead to a more representative PNB? For the life of me, I cannot see why the difference between this new proposal and the bylaws themselves is large enough, or substantial enough, to wreck the entire move towards new bylaws.
I hope that members of the iPNB will see that the need to ratify the new bylaws is more important than the wishes of a few members with a different agenda. Please note that the affirmative action provisions and guarantees of inclusion in the new bylaws are strong, and so is the resolve of Pacifica members to implement them. I strongly urge everyone on these lists to support the new bylaws. No, they aren't perfect, but consider the alternative!
From: liz_mclellan [ WBAI area ]
As Usual -
A day late and a dollar short.
This document -- that is very
supportable from my perspective with a
minor changes with regards to ensuring
the INDEPENDANT ELECTIONS
WOULD that Mimi respected the deadline that would have made it possible to get this to a vote -- if perhaps she spent less time on bloviating rhetoric and more on the mechanical segment - though it galls me to say it I would be able to support it.
But as it stands it's a monkey wrench and merely another grandstanding behavior before another IPNB meeting. Something we've all gotten used to at this point.
Did Mimi's new allies - the hijackers ---- get to vet the document before the free pacificers?
WHY DOES MIMI DO THIS AT THE LAST MINUTE KNOWING FULL WELL THE RAMIFICATIONS PROCEEDURALLY?
MEANING KNOWING FULL WELL THEY CANNOT BE INCORPRATED INTO THE CURRENT DRAFT.
She's lawyer and knows that due dates have consequences...why does she deny that over and over again.
Why does gravity not act on Planet Mimi?
What is at stake is this.
If we cannot approve these bylaws- Judge Sabraw will likely be the arbiter of the bylaws and will likely return us to UNELECTED LABS WITH ADVISORY POWERS ONLY __ AND SEVERLY REDUCED ONES AT THAT____ AS MIMI HAS ALWAYS OPPOSED ELECTED LABS- UNTIL IT BECAME POLICALLY UNTENABLE ___ WHAT DOES SHE GAIN BY PUTTING THE KYBOSH ON THIS PROCESS AT THE LAST MINUTE?
Why does mimi get to turn her homework in late?
In an appointed labs scenario Mimi and her cronies get to stay on the LAB and appoint their successors -- until the bylaws are changed to make elections mandatory.(READ NEVER)
That's whats on the plate for Mimi.
By what means will she get this outcome-- sounds like by any means nessesary (being such a dyed in the flashy leather pants radical she would of course choose to employ that language - bruthas and sistas)-- which included hobknobbing with the hijackers who would sell the stations (most likely KPFA---- which from her perspective would be a boon - getting rid of the one voiciferous and knowledgeable coounterwieght to her ceaseless grabs for unnaccountable power...)
That's the bottom line.
PASS THE BYLAWS
top of page | bylaws revisions process info page | governance proposals | bylaws etc | home