[blindlaw] Who does NFB really support?

[Mike Freeman]

We *do* acknowledge that others have a different philosophy. But 
acknowledgement doesn't equal acquiescence. I submit that NFB would be 
irresponsible and not fulfilling its obligation to its membership were it 
*not* to fight the lawsuit (no matter who supports said lawsuit) since 
aresolution opposing it was passed at the2002 national convention.

You ask why NFB can't leave well enough alone and let others advocate for 
what they believe unchallenged? Did you pose the same question to ACB when 
it opposed NFB Newsline(TM) in many states? Or did you protest when ACB 
tried o derail NFB's effort to ge the Louis Braille Commemorative Coin 
legislation enacted? Perhaps you did and I missed it. But very few did so.

It always angers me when double-standards are applied to NFB actions: it 
often seems as though if ACB wants something, we of NFB are expected to get 
out of the way. But let NFB want something and all hell breaks loose!

I'm sure you didn't mean it this way and my comments are more general. I, 
too, wish there were a middle way. But that's about as likely to happen as 
for partisan politics to cease to exist.

Mike Freeman, President
National Federation of the Blind of Washington

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joshua E. Saunders" <joshuasaunders at sbcglobal.net>
To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Who does NFB really support?


> Randy I thought you made some good points.  Apparently the blind are no
> different from any other minority group in this country.  Someone can 
> always
> be found.  Frankly I am surprised by my own anger at learning that the
> national Federation of the blind encouraged the Bush administration to
> appeal.  I have enough vision to read currency and so this will not impact
> me personally.  I just wish that the Federation could have allowed the
> lawsuit to proceed without becoming personally involved.  The Federation 
> is
> entitled to its philosophy that blind people should conform themselves to
> the cited world in which we find ourselves as much as possible.  I wish 
> the
> Federation would acknowledge that other blind people have an equal right 
> to
> a different philosophy.  My personal philosophy is somewhere in the middle
> and I think there are probably many blind people that wish that a middle
> ground could be found.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "dlb723" <dlb723 at comcast.net>
> To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 2:12 PM
> Subject: [blindlaw] Who does NFB really support?
>
>
> National Federation of Blind Aligns with Bush Administration Appeal of
> Landmark Currency Ruling
> by Randy Shaw, Dec. 13, 2006
>
> When a federal judge recently ruled that the United States must follow the
> lead of 180 nations and modify its currency to accommodate the blind, the
> decision
> was applauded by sources ranging from the New York Times to The Daily Show
> with John Stewart. But the Bush Administration had an ace up its 
> sleeve---a
> self-described advocacy group for blind persons that has repeatedly 
> aligned
> itself against key civil rights measures for the blind. The National
> Federation
> of the Blind (NFB) stood alone among major blind and disability rights
> organizations in publicly denouncing the ruling, and urged the Bush
> Administration
> to appeal. On December 12, the NFB got its wish, and even issued a press
> release "applauding" the Treasury Department's appeal of the historic
> ruling.
>
> As I wrote on
> December 1,
> the NFB, a controversial nonprofit with ties to Diebold voting machines, 
> was
> trying to provide political cover for the Bush Administration's potential
> decision
> to appeal a federal court ruling that would make US currency more 
> accessible
> to the blind.
>
> I received dozens of responses from blind persons and organizations to my
> article, and all supported the court's decision. But the NFB has made it
> clear
> over its history that it thinks it knows the interests of blind people
> better than they do, and so it issued a press release condemning the
> landmark court
> victory.
>
> Many of these responses detailed questionable practices by the NFB that go
> well beyond what was detailed in my article. For example, I learned that 
> the
> NFB even opposes guide dogs for the blind!
>
> Now the NFB is applauding the Bush Administration's decision to appeal a
> ruling that was lavishly praised across America.
>
> The Bush Administration has had success finding African-Americans who 
> oppose
> civil rights enforcement and affirmative action, Latinos who oppose
> immigration
> reform, environmentalists who support Alaska drilling and labor staff who
> oppose unions.
>
> The NFB fits perfectly in this collection, as it works hard to deny civil
> rights to those it claims to represent.
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw
>