[Vision2020] Campaign contributions

[Joe Campbell]

Doug,

This is an important issue, so I want to make a few points clear.

I am not denying Weitz's right to sue if he thought that the last election was improperly run. And I think that his ideas about the importance and need for a greater vo-tech element within the MSD are spot on.

What I deny is the suggestion that Weitz was justified in filing the suit in order to pressure the MSD into adopting his policies. This is not a right protected by the Constitution.

It was this suggestion -- made by Donovan and implied by the Conciliation Petition of the Committee for Goodwill and Conciliation -- that I was referring to in my post.

Apart from being unjustified, Weitz's lawsuit -- if filed for the reasons noted above -- is impractical, since it is unlikely that the MSD will respond well to these tactics. Note that this is my chief grievance with Weitz: His actions have rendered the realization of his initial and laudable goal less probable.

On a side note, your continual attempts to muddy the waters of this debate are nice examples of precisely what bugs me about the rhetorical style of your pastor, from whom you have apparently 'learned' much. It is not too late, though, since I'm teaching logic again next semester and would be glad to tutor you for free in an effort to get you to learn some new techniques, e.g., those created by Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle and perfected by Aquinas, Augustine, and Luther, among others.

Please forgive me if I fail to respond to your reply! I'm in the middle of teaching summer school.

Best, Joe

---- heirdoug at netscape.net wrote: 

=============
Joe,

 Were not the statements you made part of your argument?

  I also thought that the authority of the government derived it's just 
powers from the people it governs? I guess you tossed out the 
constitution when you you became a "professional" philosopher!



doug!



-----Original Message-----

From: Joe Campbell <joekc at adelphia.net>

To: heirdoug at netscape.net

Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com

Sent: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 7:56 am

Subject: Re: campaign contributions

Doug,

  Afallacy is a fallacious argument. You quoted a statement (or maybe 
two

statements) not an argument, so whatever it is it is not a fallacy.

This cheap point aside, I take it that you disagree with the 
statement(s).

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree! One problem with your two 
examples

is that Weitz has neither the power nor the authority of OSHA and the

government.

Best, Joe



---- heirdoug at netscape.net wrote:



=============

Joe,







Your statement below seems to me to be a fallacy. If you use the same

logic in the construction industry and OSHA came up to you would you

comply? The government uses "blackmail-style" pressure all the time to

make you change your habits.



Doug!







" for the simple reason that people do not respond well to

blackmail-style pressure. "







"Tell me, if someone sued you in an effort to get you to do something,

no matter how noble it was, would it increase or decrease your chance

of doing it?"







Best, Joe

________________________________________________________________________

Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- Unlimited storage and

industry-leading spam and email virus protection.














________________________________________________________________________
Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- Unlimited storage and 
industry-leading spam and email virus protection.