[Mpls] Battlegate: Natalie Johnson Lee, the Greens and the Anti-gay Bob Battle

[Mark Snyder]

On 9/19/05 10:49 PM, "Eva Young" <lloydletta at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Natalie can do as she pleases.  She does have the obligation to respond as
> a council member when I call her office.  (Which has been rarely - I think
> I've contacted her office 3 times over the 4 year term.  I personally think
> what's more interesting than Natalie's position is how the Greens rather
> than allowing Natalie or her campaign to directly defend herself, are going
> after me for raising the question.)

And as you've noted, Natalie Johnson Lee discussed the Bob Battle issue with
you on at least two occasions when you brought it up. So, even if you're
unhappy with how she responded, she did fulfill her obligation of responding
as a council member, right?

As for why Greens are "going after you," I can only speak for myself in that
I'm merely pointing out that you seem to be about the only one left who
still thinks there's something to the Bob Battle issue. Even the couple of
other people who raised questions about it last week seem to have been
satisfied by David Strand and Brandon Lacy pointing out that Natalie Johnson
Lee's actions as a council member to support GLBT issues far outweigh
anything Bob Battle ever said.

Natalie doesn't defend herself when you raise the Bob Battle issue in this
forum because she doesn't participate in this forum, as you well know. And
since you do know that Natalie doesn't participate in this forum, it seems
rather silly of you to argue that she should be defending herself rather
than for other Greens to speak in her defense.

Quite frankly, given all of the challenges that Ward 5 currently faces, I
know that if I were a Ward 5 resident, I'd much rather she spend her time
working on those issues than responding to stuff that Bob Battle made up or
that Eva Young cannot seem to get over or worrying about anything being said
about her on the Minneapolis Issues Forum.

Have you ever considered that maybe Bob Battle made up that quote in hopes
of getting Natalie Johnson Lee to make a big fuss over it and consequently
get him a great deal of attention? And so her basically ignoring it is
perhaps the best political strategy she could have employed?
 
> If the candidate LCR/MN endorsed, Don Bellfield was quoted in an article by
> Bob Battle, I would expect that LCR/MN would get jumped on for that
> endorsement (deservedly so by the way).

Perhaps at first. But my guess is as soon as it came to light that the Don
Bellfield "quote" was fiction, as is the case with Natalie Johnson Lee, then
the issue would die (deservedly so by the way).
 
> I think it's really interesting that conservative and Republican candidates
> are expected to be held accountable on these issues - but when liberal
> candidates are involved, gays should just let them take a pass.

I think it's really interesting that when it's been repeatedly stated by
several people (including some who actually participated in those meetings
and gave their first-hand accounts) that Greens did discuss the Bob Battle
article with Natalie Johnson Lee when it first came out, you still dismiss
that as expecting that "gays should just let them take a pass" - the only
real discrepancy here is in your inability to accept that this is (and
should be) a dead issue.
 
Mark Snyder
Windom Park