<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><DIV>
<DIV>"We also have different views of how to express our disagreements."</DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Yes Nick, your style is to assume a condescending and derisive and arrogant tone vis a vis easy targets, and then assume that your readers will transfer that to people like Paul, who is not such an easy target, especially in comparison to liberal warmongers you support. That said, I am no fan of Paul's economic libertarianism, but he's not the moral enemy, as you would wish your audience to assume. And then your style is to imply that your critics are impolite, rather than addressing the issues--such as your support for Obama's intervention in Libya. I get it. And then your style is to be evasive by claiming that your blog is not about your views. Like Obama, you're cute, and dangerous.<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><BR>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><FONT size=2 face=Tahoma>
<HR SIZE=1>
<B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> Nick Burbules <burbules@gmail.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> David Green <davegreen84@yahoo.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Cc:</SPAN></B> C. G. Estabrook <galliher@illinois.edu>; Peace Discuss <peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Sun, May 15, 2011 5:20:37 PM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [Peace-discuss] [PBD - Progressive Blog Digest] 5/15/2011 06:52:00 AM<BR></FONT><BR>Thanks David,
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>There's really not much I can say to this except that we have very different views of politics and of the process of change.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>We also have different views of how to express our disagreements.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>But I do want to correct the accusation that I haven't been critical of Obama on a range of policies, especially his Bush-like national security policies. I have been, repeatedly.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Anyway, my blog is not primarily about the presentation of my own views, but a collection of a range of progressive opinions -- including some much closer to your point of view than to my own. I'm sure another person would make a different selection, of course.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Nick</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 2:40 PM, David Green <SPAN dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com" rel=nofollow target=_blank ymailto="mailto:davegreen84@yahoo.com">davegreen84@yahoo.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex" class=gmail_quote>
<DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV>Hi Nick,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I still don't get the relationship between what Paul said and how it was characterized. But of course, this isn't at all about parsing the specifics of what Paul said or meant. It's about lining up with liberals and conservatives who have "sensible" approaches to government, while avoiding the prospects for re-alignment in a true anti-war coalition. And it's about keeping the two-party corporate system intact. It's pretty clear that you are still down with the notion that Obama has good intentions, and honestly, the only reason I look at your blog is to marvel at the lack of any breaking point--regardless of Obama's consistently despicable behavior--in your ability to excuse Obama and demonize his opponents, among which there isn't a "dime's worth of difference." Is it gullibility or misplaced idealism? I don't care.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I've recently, even apart from this, been asking myself why the university offers so few opportunities for honest and open political debate about these fundamental issues. I think I've got my answer. I have to say, honestly, that your approach to politics is at bottom extremely childish in your reliance on the assumption that your readers share your customary liberal stereotypes of those who don't identify themselves that way. You rely, in your own fashion, on stereotyping, scapegoats, caricatures, and (when necessary) lesser evilism. And yes, you're an elitist of the worst sort. For the record, let me make it clear that your approach is every bit as much of the fundamental problem as the Tea Party, the Koch brothers, Sarah Palin, and John Boehner. It is, in it's own fashion, equally dishonest, and a serious impediment to "progress" if that word were to ever be defined in a serious way.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>So there's your debate.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><FONT color=#888888>
<DIV>David<BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV class=hm><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: small" class=Apple-style-span><BR></SPAN></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></div></body></html>