Miles Runs Away from the Debate

Sun Jun 4 17:24:29 MDT 1995

>I can see why you are confused so I'll try to give you a little math
>lesson. The Republicans proposed a 4.5% INCREASE in the amount budgeted
>for school lunches. That means 4.5% MORE will be spent and more means an
>increase NOT a CUT. The Democrats proposed a 3.2% INCREASE and again this
>is MORE not less the what is being spent today. However, 4.5% is GREATER
>than 3.2% therefore the Republicans are proposing a BIGGER INCREASE than
>the Democrats. Using the convoluted logic of the Democrats one could say
>it is the Democrats that want to cut school lunch programs over what the
>Republicans proposed. I hope that is clear now: 4.5% is greater than
>3.2% and and increase is not a cut.
Thak you for the math lesson Dennis. However, I don't believe that this is the
only program related to the larger scope of programs that effect children. If
you were under the impression that my ORIGINAL analogy was only related to the
school luch program, then perhaps I was not clear.
In the future I'd appreciate more respect to the intention of my posts - don't
try to stray from the original subject so that you can use it as a chance to
further your own unrelated points.
>I didn't ignore your original point, I just questioned it by asking you to
>provided evidence to support the premise on which you based your assertion.
>That is a basic building block of debate. Support your statements by
>presentation of irefutable facts.
I'd suggest that you loosen up a bit. Exchanges of ideas and perspectives is
not something that can always be "supported by irefutable facts." This lists is
not only limited to debate...or is it.
In addition I am not appreciative of the fact that you accused me of running
away from a debate. Especially considering that I never intended to debate
about the dang school lunch programs for kids in the first place. *Veins
bulging from head*

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list