[Peace-discuss] Torture referendum

[Jenifer Cartwright]

Ah, so then it would say "that Bush had vetoed..."
   --Jenifer

"C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
  No. Johnson was one of five Republicans who voted in favor of the 
unsuccessful attempt to override Bush's veto.

Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
> Well said, John. I gave up on this after a couple of tries and bless you 
> for hanging in. I think the rewrite helps enormously... and I'd even add 
> "that Bush had vetoed" or "that Bush then (or subsequently) vetoed" 
> depending on the time sequence of the two (my take on it finally is that 
> Johnson's vote preceded Bush's veto, right?) Wonderful that Johnson 
> voted on the side of decency this time!
> --Jenifer
> 
> 
> */"John W." /* wrote:
> 
> At 11:00 AM 3/31/2008, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> 
> >John, your estimate of your fellow-citizens' intelligence is as
> always
> >unnecessarily low.
> 
> All I can tell you, Carl - trying to remain civil here - is that I
> myself
> had to read the fucking thing about 5 times to understand what it
> said. The bill would have PROHIBITED the CIA from using torture - a
> negative. Bush vetoed the bill - a double negative. Johnson apparently
> voted to override Bush's veto - either a triple negative, or a
> double-double negative, depending on how you look at it. I had to
> read it
> about 5 times, and break it down into its component parts just as I
> have
> here, to determine whether Johnson was for or against torture, and I'm
> still not 100% positive. I think he wants to prohibit the CIA from
> employing torture, but I'm not sure.
> 
> The reason why I asked if Johnson supported the actual anti-torture
> bill in
> the first place is (a) because of my confusion in reading your draft
> referendum, and (b) if so, why not just say THAT? Something like,
> "Given
> Representative Timothy Johnson's support for a bill outlawing torture,
> which was vetoed by pResident Bush...." ?
> 
> But you do what you like. You're a professor. You know everything about
> everything. Why, I'll bet there are a couple of studies that prove
> empirically in a statistically significant manner that my fellow
> citizens
> are more intelligent, more informed, more patient in reading obscure,
> pedantic referenda than I think they are!
> 
> 
> 
> >Two corrections: the draft sentence should of course end with a
> question
> >mark, and the meeting is not this Tuesday but next. --CGE
> >
> >
> >
> >John W. wrote:
> >
> >>At 06:16 PM 3/30/2008, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> >>
> >>>Here's a draft of a referendum to be proposed at the Champaign
> Township
> >>>annual meeting Tuesday night:
> >>>
> >>>"Noting that Representative Timothy Johnson voted to override
> President
> >>>Bush's veto of a bill that would have prohibited the CIA from using
> >>>torture, shall the citizens of Champaign Township urge our
> congressional
> >>>representatives to renew their efforts to pass such a bill."
> >>
> >>How many Peace-discuss readers think that this sentence is way too
> >>complex and convoluted for the average reader?
> >>Did (and does) Tim Johnson support the actual anti-torture bill?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Special deal for Yahoo! users & friends - No Cost. Get a month of 
> Blockbuster Total Access 
> > > now


       
---------------------------------
Special deal for Yahoo! users & friends - No Cost. Get a month of Blockbuster Total Access now
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20080331/3fbeaa3c/attachment.html