could someone explain this to me?
Sun May 29 19:19:32 EDT 2005
>A Bible reader and smart person like yourself Donna should be able to see
>the significance of all of this without placing partisan blame. It's both
>sides who have brought us to where we are.
Umm, I think, as often happens in a prolonged discussion, that I've been
misconstrued. I don't think I said or implied that only one side is right
and one side is wrong. We had a specific discussion about Michael Savage
and about Chuck Harder and about Al Franken and Randi Rhodes. But I was
not in any way saying that one side has it all right and the other side has
it all wrong. I believe I've said repeatedly that I deplore the extremes
on both sides and find the accusations, shouting, and over the top rhetoric
very difficult to take. But some of what has been happening recently
definitely IS partisan because one party controls both the executive branch
and the congress. On the other hand, there were plenty of things Clinton
did that I wasn't happy about-- especially the Telecom Act. He said later
that he felt congress, which by that time was in the hands of Republicans
and pro-business Democrats, was gonna over-ride him if he vetoed it, but he
should have taken more of a stand when he had a chance.
That having been said, I still can't buy some of Chuck Harder's theories,
and when hosts make accusations without any proof whatsoever, even though I
understand it's a rhetorical device, it still bugs me.
More information about the Boston-Radio-Interest