 |
 |
Dear David Ledgere, I hope you don't mind if I post this to the list as my original letter was to the list and so was your offer to deliver messages to Reno. First off while my wife is the one who is currently subscribed to the list with her account, we both read all posts jointly. But in this case the letter sent by us was written by me. I basically support the statements made by SOME on the list concering being concerned for Reno's personal feelings at this time in her life. But we must consider that she made some tremendous sacrifices when she decided to become a public figure. So I feel that if you are going to on your own reject or accept letters to her, I would still like mine to be given to her as it stands, third person and all. Maybe she needs to read one that is more down to earth so that she remembers that she is a public figure and has to consider more than just her own personal feelings in her job and in her dealing with Parkinson's. By the way I received at least 5 responses from others on the list saying that my letter should be sent. That was before you made your offer. Eric Adams On Sun, 3 Dec 1995 [log in to unmask] wrote: > My offer covers personal letters, which I will hand deliver. That includes > those which are "open" (broadcast widely, as in this list server) and which > are private. Your letter, however, is not addressed to her. Candidly, if I > received your message, I would be inclined to feel defensive, because it is > to a third party and because of its tone. I agree with the others on this > list who sympathize with what she must be going through and suggest a > personal letter that is supportive in tone and invites her into our > community. I know from seeing your other postings that such caring and > sympathy come naturally to you. Shall l wait for a personal letter? > From [log in to unmask] Sun Dec 3 23:36:24 1995 Date: Fri, 24 Nov 1995 01:15:43 -0500 (EST) From: Betti Adams <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Reno, politics and Parkinsons With regard to Janet Reno's disclosure on having Parkinsons, what seems unfortunately to be happening is that the current administration, in order to maintain Reno's political position as Attorney General, is passing Parkinsons off as a minor inconvenience for all those inflicted with the disease, including Reno. This is bad because it can cause national apathy towards Parkinsons and thus a reduction in research spending. The solution to this problem would be for Reno to step forward and acknowledge that Parkinsons for her now is only an inconvenience but she will have to face the future when it comes and that the future might dictate a change in her political abilities. And she must explicitly iterate that Parkinsons is much, much more than a minor inconvenience for many if not most Parkinsons patients. If Reno fails to do this she will not only be failing the Parkinson community she will be failing herself because without doubt the time will come when she will have to rely on the research that is taking place today and that might not take place in the future. Anyone think we should forward this to Reno? Eric & Betti Adams [log in to unmask]