[Vision2020] The BLog and More Political Contributions

[g. crabtree]

And what makes you think that the distinction escapes me? I was merely calling into question the need to condemn a man (or his sign?) for making his opinion known. I was also a little unclear as to why it might be mandatory  for a candidate to fall in line and express his opinion on another mans opinion, as I expressed in my opinion of Ms. Hovey's opinion of Mr. Carscallen's opinion of Mr. Glasebrook's opinion. See what this leads to? Chaos!

g
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sunil Ramalingam" <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 10:32 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The BLog and More Political Contributions


> Gary,
> 
> While I've never seen you attack anyone's right to expression, you've spent 
> plenty of time criticizing the content of those with whom you disagree.  
> Good for you.
> 
> It's no different with Glasebrook's sign.  I would never try to stop him 
> from creating or displaying his sign, but I certainly think he's wrong and 
> it was ridiculous.  That's not the same as trying to ban him or restrain his 
> speech.
> 
> I'm surprised that suddenly the distinction eludes you.
> 
> Sunil
> 
> 
>>From: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>>To: "Sue Hovey" <suehovey at moscow.com>,        "Donovan Arnold" 
>><donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>,        "Tom Ivie" <the_ivies3 at yahoo.com>,   
>>      "Moscow Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>,        "Dan Carscallen" 
>><areaman at moscow.com>, <wdkrauss at clearwire.net>,        <wmsteed at aol.com>
>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The BLog and More Political Contributions
>>Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:45:08 -0700
>>
>>Ms. Hovey,
>>
>>Regarding Dan Carscallen's comment regarding Mr. Glasebrooks sign. Wouldn't 
>>an outright condemnation be little different than taking the man to task 
>>for exercising his right to express his opinion in public? Whether you 
>>agree or not there is no question but what Mr. Glasebrook truly believes 
>>that the candidates in question are bigoted toward his church. I would 
>>think that reasonable people could disagree without having to demand  they 
>>condemn him. I don't remember any call for condemnation for letter writer's 
>>who went to the fanatical extreme of expressing the opinion that Dr. Weitz  
>>hates kids. But I suppose that was a different, more intimate ox being 
>>gored in that instance.
>>
>>One thing I do know is that in a medical emergency I would be incredibly 
>>pleased to see Dan's face as he dropped everything to do his absolute level 
>>best to keep me among the living as, I suspect, would you. If we're willing 
>>to trust him that far how much more of a stretch is it to trust him with a 
>>council seat? I believe that he'll look for the compromise that would make 
>>both of us equally mad as well as evenly pleased and devote the same 
>>competence to deciding matters of city business that he does to his other 
>>vital activities. Please give him your consideration.
>>
>>g
> 
> 
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>               http://www.fsr.net                       
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20071102/23c41159/attachment.html