From: sclawson@bottles.cs.utah.edu (steve clawson)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 11:47:35 +0800
To: hallam@ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: whitehouse web incident, viva la web revolution
In-Reply-To: <31B5C131.167E@ai.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <199606061652.KAA01488@bottles.cs.utah.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Hallam-Baker uttered:
> I find Meeks' style somewhat tiresome. It is tabloid jornalism
> rather than reasoned argument. His dislike for the Clinton is 
> well known - he recently accused the administration of being
> fascist. 

     Ok, I'm with you to here...

> I know of no evidence that the Clinton administration
> has a genocide policy, it is an insult to the 10 million civilians
> murdered by Hitler to use the term facist simply as a term of abuse,
> especialy if it is being used as a substitute for an argument.

     While I agree that merely branding Clinton a facist without
backing it up is childish, I really don't see how it's `an insult to
the 10 million civilians murdered by Hitler.'  Come on now!  Facist
does not necessarily imply Hitler, or even Nazi.  The term facist has
roots that go at least as far back as the Romans, and I don't recall a
`genocide policy' as a prerequisite to being facist at any point in
history.  Even if he had called Clinton a Nazi, how does that equate
to insulting those killed by Hitler and his flunkies?  Perhaps calling
someone a Communist also is insulting everyone that Stalin killed?


steve

-- 
// stephen clawson				sclawson@cs.utah.edu
// university of utah