Re: Alert: Bush Ally (Next AG?) Defends Forced AA

[Guest guest]

Priceless. Thanks Wally.

> Re: Alert: Bush Ally (Next AG?) Defends Forced

>AA

>Chapter 2 of Fingarette's " Heavy Drinking: The Myth of Alcoholism as a

>Disease " is entitled " Can alcoholics control their drinking? " The chapter

>discusses the arguments and the experiments, and the chapter's 25 footnotes

>are mostly references (sometimes multiple references within each footnote)

>to studies showing control.

>

>--wally

>

[Guest guest]

Taken as a whole I can only see a Bush administration helping the cause.

Here's the most powerful man in the world who is believed by every stepper

out there to be an alcoholic, yet he doesn't call himself an alcoholic and

he got sober by methods other than 12-step. I know many here are

uncomfortable with the religious transformation aspect of his story but it

has to be a PR hit for AA because now millions of people around the world

know that people do get sober outside of AA.

Nate

[Guest guest]

Fear not, folks. The National Review may be the platform our battle

flag has been looking for. BTW Jim and , Buckley is a fan of

Szasz, believe it or not. I have lots of computer time the next two

nights and will dedicate myself, but will write no letters before I

consult with you people. Good work Stuart. If we work together on

this I KNOW we can come up with a devastating slam dunk of this

constitutional outlaw.

[Guest guest]

i dont want to say i told you all so...but.. i will. serously, if we are

going to be a small vocal minortiy of ineterent 'kooks " about

2-stepism,w e should be able organize a letter writingand

internet campiagn.

ona side note, its too bad keating didnt mention wilson was

tripping his balls off on belleadona when he had his " spirtual

awakening " and that he promoted and belived in LSD as a

" spirtual " cure for addiction, maybe if he did, we could end the

War on drugs in this country

> > > Hot off the presses. The latest National Review features

an

> > > article by Oklahoma Governor Keating defending

forced AA.

> > > Keating is high on the list of possible Bush administration

> > nominees

> > > to serve as Attorney General.

> > >

> > > Keating shows himself to be a total hard-core stepper.

> > >

> > > By the way, I cannot imagine anyone who Gore might

have

> > > considered as AG writting such nonsense.

> > >

> >

>

**********************************************************************

> > > Repealing Alcoholics Anonymous

> > > The courts go too far — again.

> > >

> > > By Gov. Keating of Oklahoma

> > >

[Guest guest]

also, if we dont try to stop this , you KNOW the steppers ARE

going to push all kinds of AA shit thru a pro step government.

.. we should start something about it soon, because i promise

you, we WILL see more of this kind of talk from a bush

presidency. its not the president that makes it most impact, its

the appointees, including the supreme court

> > > > Hot off the presses. The latest National Review

features

> an

> > > > article by Oklahoma Governor Keating defending

> forced AA.

> > > > Keating is high on the list of possible Bush

administration

> > > nominees

> > > > to serve as Attorney General.

> > > >

> > > > Keating shows himself to be a total hard-core stepper.

> > > >

> > > > By the way, I cannot imagine anyone who Gore might

> have

> > > > considered as AG writting such nonsense.

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

**********************************************************************

> > > > Repealing Alcoholics Anonymous

> > > > The courts go too far — again.

> > > >

> > > > By Gov. Keating of Oklahoma

> > > >

[Guest guest]

> i dont want to say i told you all so...but.. i will. serously, if

we are

> going to be a small vocal minortiy of ineterent 'kooks " about

> 2-stepism,w e should be able organize a letter writingand

> internet campiagn.

>

> ona side note, its too bad keating didnt mention wilson was

> tripping his balls off on belleadona when he had his " spirtual

> awakening " and that he promoted and belived in LSD as a

> " spirtual " cure for addiction, maybe if he did, we could end the

> War on drugs in this country

ROTFL!

Keating's rant really got me hot, but then I realized just how

reckless and candid it was.. much too reckless, it seemed. This is

what stepper politicos really believe but seldom admit to. Steppism

thrives on stealth and secrecy--this frank manifesto has to be a

liability it seems to me. He seemed to contradict his own argument

and dig himself into a hole in places. Needless to say, I am appalled

that his name has been mentioned as a possible AG.... not a good job

for a rabid stepper, but at least he outed himself.

Jim

[Guest guest]

Tommy,

I hope you're right. I found this old tidbit at Cato.

http://www.cato.org/

Jim

---

December 1986, National Review, President Reagan's favorite magazine,

featured two articles sharply critical of the current drug war.

Cowan, one of the authors, wrote:

In his anti-drug speech, President Reagan urged: " Please remember

this when your courage is tested: You are Americans. You're the

product of the freest society mankind has known. No one--ever--has

the right to destroy your dreams and shatter your life. " Precisely,

Mr. President. And we should remember the same thing when our urine

is tested. This tragi-comical, degrading, dehumanizing invasion of

private bodily functions is the perfect symbol of drug prohibition,

the logical conclusion of the subordination of the individual to a

failed policy. We are not going to be drug-free, just unfree.[25]

Supporters of some form of legalization or decriminalization [26]

represent all bands of the political spectrum: trial attorney Louis

Nizer; economists Sowell and Milton Friedman; psychiatrist

Szasz; columnists Chapman, F. Buckley, Jr.,

and Cohen; law professors Alan Dershowitz and Randy Barnett;

criminologist Ernest vanden Haag; and " 20/20 " host Hugh Downs, to

name a few.[27]

---

In 12-step-freeegroups, " Tommy Perkins " <perkinstommy@h...>

wrote:

> Fear not, folks. The National Review may be the platform our

battle

> flag has been looking for. BTW Jim and , Buckley is a fan of

> Szasz, believe it or not. I have lots of computer time the next

two

> nights and will dedicate myself, but will write no letters before I

> consult with you people. Good work Stuart. If we work together on

> this I KNOW we can come up with a devastating slam dunk of this

> constitutional outlaw.

[Guest guest]

A note an letters to politicians.

I think any approach that attacks Christianity and spirituality is doomed to failure. These guys are so used to being attacked for their Christian beliefs that your letter will not be heard. If will be filed in the "Left-wing whacko" category before you get a chance to make what is a great point. Also, try not to let them know how much you hate them. Letters and articles that begin with the idea of "I hate you, so you should listen to me" are doomed to failure.

If you want to get your point across, first talk about results and money, then talk about first amendment rights. Tell them about how other programs work better than AA and are much cheaper than expensive treatment. Then at that point bring up first amendment rights. You have to understand these people. A major reason they defend forced AA is that they see a government that actively persecutes Christians, as opposed to being neutral. Forced AA is just one battle in the war they're fighting and to give here is to take one step closer so losing. So don't make this a battle against Christian beliefs, make this a battle against AA.

Dear President Bush

Congratulations on winning the U.S. Presidency. I was proud to cast my vote for your cause and will continue with my support throughout your Presidency. I am writing to suggest a different approach in the nation's policy of drug and alcohol treatment.

I would like to inform you that many have solved their drug/alcohol problem by methods that do not begin with the idea that alcoholism is a disease. These methods are much more streamlined and are less controversial because they do not rely on a spiritual solution to the problem. This being the case, an injustice is being done in our court system, not only because many are being forced into treatment that is not effective as it could be, but also because this system raises serious first amendment questions. A change in government policy in this area could solve a lot or problems.

Yours Truly,

Nate