Michael wrote:
>And you don't see this as a recant? That's why I put it there.
To be perfectly honest, no. If you had meant to recant it, you would have
scrolled to the top of your message before sending it, and deleted it.
Obviously, you intended to put those words out there for public
consumption. If you wish to recant now, I will accept it, however.
Our previous exchange:
>>> It wasn't meant as a personal
>>> attack, but I dare say your comment about *all* greens being "lunatics"
>>> was.
>> It seems to me that someone who is so concerned about proper quoting
should
>> be a little more careful with what he quotes. Did I say "*all* greens"
>> Michael? Or did I refer to a very specific organization, namely The
>> Greens/Green Party USA. Allow me to refresh your memory:
> Even worse, many of his supporters come
> from The Greens/Green Party USA, and those people are flat out
lunatics,
> with almost no understanding of economics, or good governance.
Michael wrote:
>Please note, I never put the word all in quotes,
No, you put the word "all" in italics, by using those asterisks you added.
>but from what you wrote, it is unmistakably implied that *all* Greens are
lunatics. I don't see >any difference here in what you said. You
unmistakably say that Greens (not "some >Greens", not "most Greens", not
"many Greens", so "all Greens" is implied) are lunatics.
Aha!!!! I have found our problem, Michael..... I know more about your
movement than you do. You will notice that I never wrote "the Greens,"
but rather The Greens/Green Party USA. Not the capital "T" on The. The
Greens/Green Party USA is a one of the major organizing umbrellas for
greens in the United States. They have endorsed Ralph Nader for
President, and are some of their most vigorous supporters, laying a lot of
the groundwork for his campaign. Their radical platform agenda of The
Greens/Green Party USA was the subject of a recent list discussion.
>Let me spell out the difference then. I never said that
>Republicans/Democrats are lunatics. I never said that they are anything. I
>mearly stated a (perhaps a little exagerated, but still true) reflection of
>their policy. If you think that that makes them lunatics, that's your
>judgement, not mine. And if you do think that makes them lunatics, then why
>are you voting for them?
I sincerely hope that you can recognize the logical straw man of your
original argument. I support the Republican Party because I believe that
moderate action in defence of the environment, rather than extreme action,
is the most prudent course of action based on the evidence available. I
do not have "no problem" as you put it, with my own death or the extinction
of species. Nor, however, do I believe that my death is imminent from
environmental damage, nor is ecological catastrophe looming.
JDG
_______________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
"Now is not the Time for Third Chances,
It is a Time for New Beginnings."
- George W. Bush 8/3/00
******************VOTE BUSH / CHENEY 2000 *******************
