[lit-ideas] Re: Barnett's Blueprint for Action

  • From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 23:22:37 -0400

I'm assuming that you think Eric can't reply for some reason?  I'll do the best 
I can with Barnett.  Saying we need new rule sets (rules) is on the one hand 
stating the obvious, but the obvious is sometimes the very thing people don't 
see, especially given that we're still fighting WWII over there.  Needing new 
rules also flies in the face of staying the course, never making a mistake, 
which is Bush's signature and what he got reelected on, so no one can say 
Barnett is wrong; we definitely need new rules.  Seems like maybe we need to 
drop the control thing and stop quarterbacking the world.  It's not working 
very well if you noticed.  I also never made up anything about Barnett.  I will 
be fair with him, Lawrence, and I'll let you know what I think, if anything.  


----- Original Message ----- 
From: Lawrence Helm 
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 9/10/2006 10:28:41 PM 
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Barnett's Blueprint for Action


Well, I really wanted Eric?s take on what Barnett had to say about Iran, 
perhaps China as well.

I suppose I am curious about how you?ll (Irene) be able to misread something 
you watch.  But I suppose you?ll (Irene) will manage.

Lawrence

Other related posts: