From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Pro-Choice
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:54:19 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc

In <21371@rpp386.lonestar.org> jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:

>In article <1992Aug12.150738.16951@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>Nonsense, John.  Oh, I don't doubt that a lot of anti-abortion groups
>>use this sort of questioning to arrive at their propaganda numbers,
>>but most reputable pollsters don't.  

>Most reputable pollsters aren't.

>I pay you to conduct a poll.  You will find what I have paid you to find
>because if you don't, you won't get paid again.

Except, of course, that it doesn't quite work like that.  However,
you've never been known to let reality interfere with your claims, so
I guess it would be unrealistic to expect you to start now.

>The news media (and the polling services are increasing the same thing
>as "the news media") is inherently left-leaning.  The results that the
>pollsters from the news media are going to find will be left-leaning.

If you had said "broadcast media", you might have a case.  However,
the claim that 'the news media (including newspapers, magazines, etc.)
is somehow 'left leaning' is simply not supported by the facts.  The
results that the 'pollsters from the news media' are going to find
will be the answers they got.

>>Is English your first language?  I ask this because you seem to have
>>some real problems with it (on top of all your 'redefinitions' of
>>words and phrases).  I would think that most people would interpret
>>your hypothetical question to be exactly the reverse of what you had
>>your hypothetical respondent do.  It's all in the ordering of the
>>clauses.  I would interpret what you asked as being equivalent to
>>asking if there are any circumstances under which abortion SHOULDN'T
>>be permitted; i.e., "Should abortion be permitted under all
>>circumstances," where 'any circumstances' is its common usage from
>>such phrases as "I would not do that under any circumstances".  To get
>>the interpretation you came up with, I would expect the question to be
>>worded, "Are there any circumstances under which abortion should be
>>legal?"

>Yes, English is my first language.  I am a published writer.  Obviously
>other people are suitably convinced that what I write is "English."  I
>will be (I hope) presenting a paper at the upcoming USENIX Security
>Symposium.  It isn't much of a paper, but I did write it in English, and
>it does appear to have been accepted (warts and all ...)

Children's books don't count.  Anyway, I guess this leaves us at a
loss as to why it is that you can't seem to understand English here,
and why yours seems to be so, well, MUTABLE.

>The question "Should abortion be legal under any circumstances?" is
>quite obvious in its meaning.  

Well, I think so, too.  But not the meaning you seem to want to give
it.  

>It is very different from the question
>"Should abortion be legal under all circumstances?"  

No, it isn't.  Well, not unless one interprets the question the way
you did.

>The first question
>is answered "YES" if any one "circumstance" is a "YES" answer.  It is
>quite different from the second where the answer is "NO" if there
>exists any one circumstance under which abortion should be illegal.

Only if one interprets the question the way you did.  

>The clause which you have so much trouble with is quite similiar to
>the clauses "under some circumstances", "under certain circumstances",
>"under limited circumstances" and so on.  The word "any" is defined by
>my $3.95 Websters as "any one or ones <take ~ books you like>".  You
>should go buy one of those dictionaries.

Or perhaps you should get a better one that includes more than one
definition? 

>>Hmmm, perhaps this explains your problems?  You just aren't precise
>>enough in your use or understanding of language?

>Given that I regularly write technical proposals, documentation, training
>materials, etc., 

Gee, really?  I'm just SO impressed.

>I'd say the problem is that you lack the intelligence to
>read what is placed before you.  

Yes, but then you're so known for this sort of thing that there's even
a term for it.  "Haugh's Manure".

>Perhaps that explains why your make
>believe degree in economics has done you no good.  

No, I prefer to make my living with the make-believe ones in math and
C.S.  The pay is just so much better.  I've really got to write to the
university and let them know that the great net.ghod, Joh Haugh II,
has pronounced them to be 'make believe'.  I'm sure they'll
immediately cease to exist in response to that.

>I will try to write at
>the 5th grade level more often.

Are you sure you can handle writing that far above your competency
level?


-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.