Miles Runs Away from the Debate

Thu Jun 1 13:22:28 MDT 1995

>No Miles, you used 'cutting programs' to justify your position. To use
>such a 'fact' as justification for an agrument you must be willing to provide
>evidence that the 'facts' used are correct. You can't used false statements
>to make a point about anything.
I see that you seem to still want to make 'cutting programs' the issue here.
Okay fine Dennis I'll diverge from the original topic.
When I wrote this I wasn't thinking about the whether or not programs for kids
were cut. I now take this time out to retract the statement. Sorry if it
offended anyone.
I'd like to reiterate my original point.
Liberal think that repuiblicans are anti child because of their efforts to cut
FUNDING for programs that affect children. Similarly insane is conservatives
thinking that liberals of Clinton's ilk think people cannot think for
My original point was that I've heard both of these types of statement from
both side. I don't believe either is close to the truth. They are just
overdramatic ways of defining the opposition.
Is that clear enough Dennis.
As an individual who communicates with others whether it be in debate
or casual conversation, I am aware that sometime people can make
mistakes. I prefer, to allow certain mistakes to pass as long as feel I feel
I've understood the intended point. Sometimes however, the small mistakes can
confuse the intended point, in which case clarification is only expected. But
that's just me. I suppose I should adopt Dennis's much more meticulous
protocol for the expression of ideas, not leaving room for the human brain to
use it's powers of fuzzy logic, extrapolation and deduction. Meaning any
examples used to illustrate a point must be absolutely true and clear even
when unecessary.

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list