From: lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.elections
Subject: Re: SC rally: "We don't want a draft dodger for president!"
Date: 11 Sep 1992 18:37:34 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co.

In article <ART.92Sep11123039@world.std.com>, art@world.std.com (Al Thompson) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Sep11.151548.2253@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov (Dr. Norman J. LaFave) writes:
> 
> [...]
>    Oh shove it Al. With the exception of the title in my .sig, which I have
>    explained so many times I could spit, I have never LORDED my degree over
>    anyone, even when I was under baseless attack (like now).
>    Show me some proof from my postings where I used my degree as a tool for
>    making an arguement.
> 
> Just what do you call it when you refer to rednecks with fifth grade
> educations?
> 
>  I have used my research and my experience (as have
>    others), but never my degree. Come on Mr. net.etiquette, let's see it.
>    You know, a little ex-lax might do you alot of good.
> 
>    So I called the
>    people at Darlington Red-necks... Big deal. a.) It was a joke, b.) I was
>    making a point about in-bred biases being easy to manipulate, c.)
>    nobody else seems to have taken offense to it, d.) the comment had nothing to
>    do with my degree. It was a statement about the use of irrelevant
>    smokescreens as a substitute for discussions of the issues (alot like the
>    drivel in your posting), and the unfortunate effectiveness of such tactics
>    with large blocks of the electorate.
> 
>    So why don't you go take your %$#* down the hall and tell someone who gives
>    a &*(%^$$#!
> 
> It was the fifth grade educations stuff that sunk you.
> 
> 

I admit that I may have been a little hard on the Darlington race fans.
However, it is not without reason. Let me explain.
I grew up in a small southern town
full of people much like them and I remember how people discussed political
issues. You couldn't drag them into a library, get them to read a newspaper,
or watch a news program. They couldn't have cared less about discussing real
issues or programs. However, give them a little sensationalistic crap like
this and they suddenly came alive. Off to the polling booths they would go,
convinced they were "informed voters".

It's not a matter of intelligence or education (many of them have more than
sufficient intelligence and more every-day sense than most), it's a matter of
caring enough
about the future of your family, your neighbors, and your community to
make an effort to learn about the issues, study the candidates records, and
making your vote count for something.

We have had 12 disasterous years due to these sheep. Ronald Reagan presented
them with flags, bombs bursting in air, mom, apple pie, and baseball and they
bought it hook, line, and sinker. The sad thing is that they have been the
ones to suffer the worst due to his policies and they are still falling for
these substance-less smokescreens. And now, here they are falling for
a brand new set of smokescreens.... (family-values, draft records,....).

It's about time someone took these members of the electorate to task. If you
are not going to study the issues, study the records, read the postion papers,
..., don't vote. Voting is more than pulling a lever.

To Al....I may have been too harsh with these people but I, and others, have
suffered greatly from their naivetae (sp?). Many of us have watched our
dreams go up in smoke. We are frustrated and fed-up. Furthermore, it still
does not excuse your behavior in previous postings. You had the opportunity
to discuss this with me by private e-mail but you chose to embarass me
publicly. I don't expect to get it, but I think you owe me an apology.

Dr. Norman J. LaFave