[Vision2020] Separate V2020 Lists?

Sat, 24 Jan 2004 08:02:32 EST

--part1_1e2.180305c7.2d43c6e8_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Tim et. al.

Sunil brought up your "interest" in Bill Clinton on V2020.  I merely echoed 
that, personally, I had had quite enough of this subject during his 
impeachment, and to paraphrase, that my opinion on this should not dictate what YOU find 
worthy of discussion on V2020, nor should anyone's opinion censor anyone else 
on a public unmoderated list serve.

I recall far more than "a few" V2020 posts from you on Clinton.  In fact, I 
recall challenging you on your statements of fact and interpretations of events 
regarding Bill Clinton's travails back and forth several times, and this was 
after I had already followed your arguments on this subject with Sunil.  But 
so what?

To make the statement "how ridiculously blind it is for any liberal to defend 
Bill Clinton" is, if not "obsessed," at least shows disregard for the 
brilliant scholars who thought Bill Clinton's impeachment was not legally warranted, 
a waste of government time and mostly politically motivated.

Perhaps there is an obsession with Wilson/CC on V2020.  I won't dispute this. 

You did not address my main points about V2020 that answered your call for a 
separate V2020 list.

Ted

--part1_1e2.180305c7.2d43c6e8_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
 Tim et. al.
 
 Sunil brought up your "interest" in Bill Clinton on V2020. &nbsp;I merel=
y echoed that, personally, I had had quite enough of this subject during his=
 impeachment, and to paraphrase, that my opinion on this should not dictate=20=
what YOU find worthy of discussion on V2020, nor should anyone's opinion cen=
sor anyone else on a public unmoderated list serve.
 
 I recall far more than "a few" V2020 posts from you on Clinton. &nbsp;In=
 fact, I recall challenging you on your statements of fact and interpretatio=
ns of events regarding Bill Clinton's travails back and forth several times,=
 and this was after I had already followed your arguments on this subject wi=
th Sunil. &nbsp;But so what?
 
 To make the statement "how ridiculously blind it is for any liberal to d=
efend Bill Clinton" is, if not "obsessed," at least shows disregard for the=20=
brilliant scholars who thought Bill Clinton's impeachment was not legally wa=
rranted, a waste of government time and mostly politically motivated.
 
 Perhaps there is an obsession with Wilson/CC on V2020. &nbsp;I won't dis=
pute this. &nbsp;
 
 You did not address my main points about V2020 that answered your call f=
or a separate V2020 list.
 
 Ted</HTML>

--part1_1e2.180305c7.2d43c6e8_boundary--