RP: >...I've found that > reading Jane Austen to a metronome often helps. So, sometimes, does > telling the truth. : ) Mike Geary ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Paul" <rpaul@xxxxxxxx> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 10:02 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Obam tried to stall G.I., Iraq withdrawal > Lawrence wrote > >> You quote me to say Lawrence: "Amy Holmes comments on Amir Taheri[s] account >> of Obama's recent actions in Iraq..." And then say that is uncritically >> accepting the evil. Obama was over there. That isn't in dispute. He did >> things. That isn't in dispute. He talked to people that isn't in dispute. >> In other words to say "Obama's recent actions in Iraq" isn't in dispute. >> I'm not going to qualify everyone of my sentences. > > Do you really take us for fools? (Do I really want to know?) It's clear > from the context of the discussion that you were not referring to > Obama's actions in some indeterminate sense, to everything he did while > he was in Iraq, or to his colloquy with General Petraeus, but to his > (alleged) demands and imprecations to the Iraqi Foreign Minister, as > 'reported' by Taheri. > >> [Judy: "Looks like a right wing site to me"] >> >> Lawrence: That would invalidate her observations about the legality of >> Obama's actions. I forgot about that. Sorry. > > No one who's been following this discussion would believe for a moment > that 'the legality of Obama's actions' refers to anything but what > Taheri alleges Obama did. Your sentence is nonsense if you yourself > don't accept Tehari's account. > > 'Qualifying' your sentences is not the solution here. I've found that > reading Jane Austen to a metronome often helps. So, sometimes, does > telling the truth. > > Robert Paul > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html