Not once did I use the word 'we' that identified us or myself with U.S. Gov doings. And I said at the outset I was not endorsing a policy, merely speculating on what it might be.
I happen to agree people exaggerate the risk of terrorism, and all kinds of other risks besides. Perhaps it is a kind of misplaced empathy for those who actually suffer. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carrol Cox Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 3:00 PM To: Progressive Economics Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Somethin' happening here.... "Max B. Sawicky" wrote: > > > Pardon my presumptuous re: "we." Henceforth I will resort to the term > "You-all." > I agree with Lou on Pronouns, and your sarcasm doesn't help at all. I've been complaining about this use of "we" at various public forums since the early '70s. I don't see why even liberals should want to share a pronoun with Murder, Inc. in Washington, D.C. And if the U.S. is going to continue to support various murderous regimes around the world (e.g., Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, Pakistan) then if the government's central objective would be to quiet terroism its first move would have to be a propaganda coampaign at home to teach the u.s. public to be realistic about what serious attacks (terrorist or otherwise are) -- that is, an attack that only kills a few thousand people is run of the mill in most of the world, and it better become something the u.s. public can take without freaking out. Carrol _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
