Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: So it begins.... Evangelicals to Bush: Payback Time

Expand Messages
  • Bryon Daly
    On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:36:18 -0500, Matthew and Julie Bos ... 5 here. They need more rating variety. I wanna be something like über 1337 non-homophobic .
    Message 1 of 113 , Nov 30, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 17:36:18 -0500, Matthew and Julie Bos
      <malamute@...> wrote:
      > On 11/30/04 4:34 PM, "William T Goodall" <wtg@...> wrote:
      > >>> <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/etc/quiz.html>
      > >>>
      > >>
      > >> I did, and got.
      > >>
      > >> 16 - Your score rates you as "high-grade non-homophobic."
      > >
      > > I did too!
      > >
      > > 10 - Your score rates you as "high-grade non-homophobic."
      >
      > I got a 24 which is also "high-grade non-homophobic"

      5 here. They need more rating variety. I wanna be something like
      "über 1337 non-homophobic". :-)
      _______________________________________________
      http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
    • Dave Land
      ... Neither, because those weren t straw men -- those were the content of the original message in the thread, in which the phrase So it begins... announced
      Message 113 of 113 , Dec 6, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        On Dec 5, 2004, at 3:12 PM, JDG wrote:

        > At 09:50 AM 12/3/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
        >> What John did was a textbook straw man. Easy to knock down, but
        >> just as easy to recognize for what it is.
        >
        > Tell me Dave, what precisely was the straw man? The part about "so
        > it
        > begins...."? Or maybe the "payback" part?

        Neither, because those weren't straw men -- those were the content of
        the original message in the thread, in which the phrase "So it
        begins..." announced the commencement of minority Christian
        conservatives' demands for a "payback" for having reportedly swung the
        vote in GWB's favor. Let's review... On Thu Dec 2 19:16:14 PST 2004,
        you wrote:

        > No... but I am also saying that the minority has no right to expect
        > that
        > their policies should remain in effect, and that the policies of
        > participants in the majority coalition should not be effected. That
        > process is not "payback" and it is not "the Coming of Shadows", it is
        > the
        > natural outcome of the electoral process we just conducted.

        It was the addition of the *quoted* phrase "the Coming of Shadows" that
        had a strawmanly look to it. You used it in a way that both Warren and I
        (at minimum) interpreted as an attempt to pose it as a quote from the
        earlier discussion with which you disagred. Perhaps I misinterpreted
        your intentions. If so, I apologize. If not, I've already called it out
        for what it is.

        As to the substance of this debate, I disagree with your statement that
        "the minority has no right to expect that their policies should remain
        in effect."

        We don't overthrow the government every four years. The minority has the
        right to expect that their policies will be given the same consideration
        as the policies of the majority coalition: if they look like they will
        lead to a better, safer life for more Americans than competing policies,
        then they should remain in effect. If they look like they will weaken
        and impoverish more Americans than competing policies, then they should
        be replaced with policies that improve our lot.

        Moreover, it's not as though Bush and company won by a landslide. They
        achieved the barest majority, which a reasonable person might view as an
        opening for reaching out to the minority, in order to widen one's
        majority next time out. They have won the privilege of setting the tone
        for the coming four years.

        Will they choose to reach out and invite the rest of the country to join
        them, or will they call them "losers" and toughen their resolve to
        become the winners next time? Do they want "one America" or two? Do they
        want an environment of conflict and retribution, or one of unity and
        cooperation?

        I think *that* is the concern of the originally-posted article.

        Blessings,

        Dave

        _______________________________________________
        http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.