BET - resolution -TI/Bill/Cliff Part II-other evidence

[Marv Walker <Marv@MarvWalker.com>]

At 12:12 AM 6/22/01 -0400, you wrote:
> > I sincerely hope Tom Ivers will continue to participate on RideCamp with
>his
> > lively, sarcastic comments, which I--and I'm certain the majority of
> > RideCampers--have found refreshing and thought provoking even when I
>didn't
> > agree with them.  (And, for those of you who disagree with Mr. Iver's
> > ideas--but don't want to hear them--isn't allowing someone you don't agree
> > with to voice their opinions what "democracy" and the "first amendment"
>are
> > all about?)
>
>What I object to is his lambasting
>and/or namecalling anyone who disagrees with, or even questions, his
>opinions.  Face it -- the man is nasty.  Is the information he can provide
>worth all the nastiness?  Probably.

We live in a Republic, not a democracy.  We are under the rule of elected
representatives, not the majority will of the mob.  Our presidential elections
are only suggestions for those representatives, they are not required by law
to abide by the results.  The Presidential selection is by the Electoral 
College.
First amendment rights refer to political expression in public forums, not a
discussion group directed by someone who is paying the costs of same.

Just a personal thing I feel compelled to point out since this assumption we
are a Democracy (the will of the masses are more important than the [Bill of]
rights of the individual) and not a Republic (where the rule of 
[Constitution] law
by representation) has the US on its deathbed.

Now then, regarding someone who gets all bent out of shape when someone
disagrees with or questions his opinion having information worth all the 
nastiness.

Since the information has not been freely questioned, analyzed and tested, how
do you know what has value and what doesn't?  Under these circumstances, my
feeling would be, the greater percentage of it would be suspect.

I'm not talking about the named party in particular because I am not really 
all that
familiar with what his claims were in the first place.  I'm talking about 
the concept
of trusting the information of one who exhibits these characteristics 
regardless of
who he is.

Marv "A Nation is doomed when the masses discover
a way to use its leadership to plunder." Walker