Dear Editor,

I went to the Latchis on a beautiful Saturday afternoon, to hear what P. Welch had to say about the stimulus. For the most part the audience was full of admirers. The meeting was set up by a couple of supporters, one of whom acted as the Master of Ceremonies.

Peter behaved like a returning hero with the proverbial bacon to feed his hungry family. He was received for the most part as such; the grateful children praised and thanked him. I could not have opened their intellect to help them understand the bacon he offers is the bacon he simply stole first from your back yard.

As I waited my turn, I decided to not attempt to change the minds of the adoring crowds but rather to ask a pertinent question with regards to policy towards corporations on the Federal Government's part, which if he answered with clarity and understanding of the problem would give him a tiny modicum of credibility in my mind.I waited as other people were entertained for minutes on end. I saw Richard Davis treated with condescension bordering on ridicule Welch reassured Richard " Everything is going to be okay. It will be okay! " almost exactly imitating a father trying to pretend for his young son in order to get him to sleep.

For all the real community work Richard Davis has been up to it was awful to see Welch use his position to belittle Richard. It was awful to see Richard with his legitimate and real doubts trying to express his lack of confidence in Welch and the Federal Government et al in a potent manner. He was clearly struggling with how to be politely submissive to Welch. It appeared that Welch was the master and Davis his servant.

My turn came and I introduced myself adding he has not yet impressed me with his work, Welch responded " Yes Emily I am aware you feel that way" .Here the MC began to shift his weight. He stood up and walked towards me as I was framing my questions. I stood against his undercurrent of intimidation.

My question was this: Do you think it is time to create a new set of legal priorities for corporations that places protection of the environment above the priority of profit for shareholders as a matter of law and legal premise ?

I also wanted to ask about Welch's willingness or not to expose the Federal Reserve for its private status, and the problems of unconstitutionality that stems from our money regulated and charged interest that goes to private,( very private) VERY wealthy units behind the scenes (?!). What should we do- or can we do- about grotesquely wealthy individuals who in the vastness of their wealth become godlike in their ability to wield influence over vast numbers of very very hard working individuals who in the minuteness of their wealth are expendable and disposable assets.

In other words I had two questions. I placed them together. And while I had taken under a minute to verbalize them, Welch answered the first by saying simply " I think it up to people to do that not government". He was about to pass over the other matter, and when I asked him to address it, I was interrupted and over-talked by this MC who indicated I was out of line to expect a second question..

I was pulled aside and further chastised for my lack of submissiveness by a woman who tried to make it about ME when it was only truly about inappropriate behavior on the part of government,with Welch of course as part and parcel .

Then someone asked about the banks, and Welch had no clear answer, but I knew someone in the room who DID. The people in the room could benefit from what this other person had to offer, what was I to do ?

I waited for Welch to pause, which he did (because he hadn't an answer), I said "excuse me?" Welch turned and acknowledged me. I said there is someone here who IS working on that in the Common Good Bank : Tom Finnell, and would you please tell more about it? But as Tom rose from his seat the tall MC unceremoniously interrupted matters yet again and by his own actions reduced what was otherwise an entirely civil exchange to a disruptive scene.

Later I apologized to the MC to see if he would be gracious enough to offer in return to me the apology I deserved more than he . But he did not. He frowned at me.

This is how and why we are stuck. People try to ingratiate themselves to persons of power and influence by driving away all but the submissive. We cannot be submissive and assert our right(s) concurrently. We the people are always reduced to soundbites sometimes by our own kind-,and edited by the editor- 500 words or less, while public servants have football fields to avoid responsibility.

Emily Peyton (submitted with her permission)