Once again, he neglects to refute my examples:
((His reply to my reply, below))
i thought i was the first to say it. back in June when i reported that Dean was the darling of the Upper east Side liberals.
-----Original Message-----
From: FlashHarry
Sent: 9/1/03 6:41 PM
To: Johnson, Richard
Subject: Re: Question on 8/28 edition
Mr. Johnson,
It's interesting that you didn't refute any of the three examples I gave in my original e-mail-you simply retorted with, "who is more liberal, except maybe Al Sharpton?" Since you acknowledge that Sharpton may in fact be 'more liberal' than Dean, I guess, by your own admission, your original statement that Dean is the 'most liberal' doesn't really hold up.
However, I would posit that being against the war in Iraq actually makes Dean quite conservative. (He was for the war in Afghanistan and the original Gulf War, by the way.) In fact, many true conservatives, including Pat Buchanan and Robert Novak, have decried the invasion of Iraq as anything but conservative. To wit, launching a 'preemptive' war against Iraq (a sovereign nation that, though arguably 'evil,' posed little or no threat to the US) without the backing of the world community, while the war against Al Qaeda was still being prosecuted, is the antithesis of conservative.
I have no problem with your politics. In fact, I consider myself quite conservative in many ways. I do, however, have a problem with the lazy repetition of a spurious talking point.
((His reply to my original e-mail, below))
who is more liberal, except maybe Al Sharpton
-----Original Message-----
From: FlashHarry
Sent: 8/28/03 2:53 PM
To: rjohnson@nypost.com
Subject: Question on 8/28 edition
http://www.nypost.com/gossip/pagesix_u.htm
You refer to Howard Dean as "the most liberal of the Democrats in the race and the most outspoken against the U.S. liberation of Iraq." While the second part may be true, the first most certainly isn't. Dean is pro-gun, pro-death penalty and a deficit hawk. How does that make him 'the most liberal?' I suppose, if you repeat something often enough, it eventually becomes accepted as truth, despite the facts.
I realize this is only the gossip page, but don't you think you should be a little more assiduous in your research before blithely tarring somebody with the 'liberal' brush?
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
