You say you want to discuss facts with citations and links and when that starts to happen, you seem to want to avoid it. I find this pattern with many people holding liberal and anti-Bush views. it seems your goal is to make general accusations, supported by those who support your general accusations by making more general accusations. When we start to look at the general accusations in detail, you avoid it. This has happened with you and others in many threads. You folks often turn the table attacking me or my style yet pretend that you are victims of my lack of ...whatever. I am not phased by it and continue.
So, I'll revert back to my old ways with my opinions and here is an analogy illustrating a logical flaw in the premise of this thread:
I eat beef, always have always will.
There is scientific evidence that supports the fact that not eating beef is good for our health and would be good for the environment.
If I were President, I would not support a ban on beef. I would have no problem appointing vegetarians to various posts in my administration. However, as policy in my administration .I would not in anyway shape or form support banning beef. I would make that clear to everyone, prior to becoming President and after becoming President.
Yet, if information was presented which showed a real trend that made Beef a serious danger to the population you represented....would you then stifle the Data to keep your beef from going away?
Vegetarian groups then make the claim that I am misusing and manipulating scientific data saying the ban of beef is good for the health of Americans and good for the environment.
They would not do so if the data was still available, as they would have nothing to bitch about.
I basically say screw these vegetarian groups. Then they get pissed off, and start a PR campaign attempting to mislead the public on my track record on this issue. Everyone who hates me for what ever reason buys it without any thought or analysis. After all these are vegetarians and they have the support of scientific data. And I am not a scientist and not a vegetarian, so what the hell would I know.
If you never attempted to hide the information, you would have nothing to worry about as far as your track record. You most certainly would not have the scientific community complaining about censure if you never tried to censure in the first place.
The truth is - the vegetarians have a political agenda and I don't support that agenda. Then based on that they make wild claims about how I manipulate, don't understand, ignore, etc, etc, scientific data. Yet, I stand firm. And a few here and there see the attacks for what they really are.
People deserve far more credit than you seem willing to give, as most now understand there has been a problem with the office of SG when it comes to free flowing information....we have the actual scientists to thank for the eye opener. Attempting to derail the topic with poorly framed analogy does little to make your case.
And that's the truth.
