As stated earlier, I am a supporter of Peter McLaughlin. This being said, I still do not believe Wizard Marks has the moral foundation upon which to be making the following statement:
>>"If a third hand report purported to be the words of one's opponent does appear in a news story, the person so misquoted (in this instance) has every right to defend him/herself and to demand a retraction as prominently displayed as was the headline for the story. The damage is already done. All of those who read this list and Pulse have already carried a misperception beyond the rather wide limits imposed by a newspaper with multi-thousands of readers and an 850+ person e-mail list."<< Given what in many people's mind was her previous outright slander of Eddie Felien, Wizard making a statement such as "The damage is already done. All of those who read this list and Pulse have already carried a misperception", is a little much; even for Wizard. I to would like Peter to answer some of the questions being asked. My support of him is in part due to my support for what I believe his answers to such questions would be. I do not think Peter has anything to worry about when engaging in such debate with Eddie. Neither does Eddie fear such debate, though admittedly Eddie has far more to gain from such debate than Peter does. Most mainstream voters are in the habit of voting for Peter McLaughlin, but not many have ever voted for Eddie. The only means for overcoming such an advantage is to engage in such debate. Even though he has a great hurdle to overcome, Eddie certainly has the advantage in such media debate, as he has NO record to stand on and he can pick and choose stances to take. Eddie also has a publication in which to print his version of the debate as if it were the truth. (In all honesty even though I may have an inflated sense of self worth, I must admit the importance of debating on a list that has 800 members, scattered around the Metro Area is highly debatable in of its self. Especially when all of them seem to have preset notions of their own! Still, I think debate on issues is important, and while he has no record to challenge, Eddie has made statements and taken stances over the years that Peter most certainly can make a great deal of "Alfalfa" on in such debate. The two candidates may have different views on a great number of different issues, but that is why we vote for one over the other. If they do not have such differences, why should we vote for Eddie? It is up to Eddie to tell us why!!! How else is he going to get good Democrats, (and some bad ones like me), to vote for him? Show me a reason to vote against an incumbent and I will usually take it, but (and it is a mighty BIG BUTT), you got to show me first. I'm from near enough to Missouri that you got to show me. And I was born during the day, but NOT yester-day, so you better show me something good. Jim Graham, Ventura Village _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
