From: GUBERT@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.words-l
Subject: Re: Reality vs. Rhetoric
Date: 15 Oct 92 12:34:32 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Comments:     Resent-From: GUBERT@UKCC.UKY.EDU
Comments:     Originally-From: "JOHN WHAT'S-THE-M-FOR? WILLIAMS"
              <WILLIAMS@MC.BITNET>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was WORDS-L@UGA

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>AAHEM.  Such extrapoltion is an unfair characterization.
Why?  What's unfair about it?   BECAUSE HE DOESN'T ADVOCATE WHAT YOU
                                SAY HE DOES.

>                                                       Does Gore
>say that the USA will pick up the tab alone?
No, he says we SHOULD, but whether out of the goodness of our hearts or Liberal
Guilt he _doesn't_ say.  He *does* say that we [taxpayers] are "unwilling"...
He's got that right.
SO, THEN THE CHARACTERIZATION WAS *NOT CORRECT* , I.E., UNFAIR
>                               Have you ever heard of the Marshall Plan as
>metaphor?
Not until today, no.   THEN YOU HAVE A BLIND SPOT WHEN IT COMES TO 'LIBERALS'
                       BECAUSE IT WAS CLEARLY MEANT TO BE A SIMILAR 'MASSIVE
                       COMMITMENT, LIKE THE MARSHALL PLAN -- YOU HAVE ADMITTED
                       NO DOLLARS WERE ATTACHED.
Hey, all I did was look up the citation in the goddam book, okay?  I was
hoping to catch the veep in an obvious clanger but it turns out that he was
right!  Now, if you want to get into the ZPG thing and how Western Society
------ HOW SO?  YOU JUST SAID ABOVE THAT HE WASN'T.

is the enemy of all mankind yatta-da yatta-da go get your own copy of the
damn thing before you accuse me of putting words into the mouth of the
husband of the new Director of Musical Purity.  All I did was insert a
footnote - I do it for a living, if that's all right with you...  What you
                   ------------ OBVIOUS PERSONAL REFERENCE OMMITTED

think of it is your business.  Like that damn Rio conference:  I was less than
eager to open my wallet for anyone who's raping the Earth and expecting me to
pay them for the honor?  Does that make me insensitive?  Perhaps the more
partisan of us might benefit from a brief examination of our own motives
before mounting the ramparts and lobbing dornicks at anyone who differs or
-- MY MOTIVES ARE AS POLITICAL AS YOURS, INFLUENCE OTHERS TO THINK AND
   BELIEVE AS I DO; BUT I LISTEN TO OTHER ARGUMENTS  -- YOURS, HOWEVER,
   IN THIS INSTANCE HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO BE FLAWED  -- IT IS GENERALLY
   AVOWED 'CONSERVATIVES' WHO WANT TO GOVERN WITHOUT COMPROMISE.  BUSH,
   FOR EXAMPLE, IS ASHAMED OF THE ONLY INSTANCE IN WHICH HE COMPROMISED
   WITH CONGRESS ON A CONTENTIOUS ISSUE, THE TAX INCREASE.
disagrees from us in the slightest.  What is this, a Purity Test?  I've had
an otherwise bad day, you bastard, and tilting at closed minds was the last
                          -------- I AM THE FIFTH OF SIX CHILDREN AND MY
                                   PARENTS WERE MARRIED FOR FOUR YEARS BEFORE
                                   THE ARRIVAL OF MY OLDEST SISTER.
          AS FOR CLOSED MINDS, WHATEVER HAPPENED TO 'FREE INTERCHANGE OF IDEAS'
thing I wanted...  Since your mind is already made up, why do you care?
                                                       ----------------
      YOUR SLOPPY THINKING MAY INFLUENCE OTHER WHO RESPECT YOU FOR YOUR
OFTEN INSIGHTFUL POSTINGS ON OTHER TOPICS.

Some of us are still weighing the issues, and your braying is interfering
                                                   -------
                                                   MEA CULPA, MEA MAXIMA CULPA
with the logical progression of thought.
         -------------------
         NO, INTERFERING WITH FALLACIOUS INFERENCES

John I know I'm gonna regret this W.
     I HOPE S0
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JAG
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU