T wrote:
> Yes, indeed Bruce--you really shouldn't have to be exposed to any opinions
> you don't agree with. Of course, you might also try arguing with
> me (or any
> one else for that matter), but apparently you are too much an intellectual
> lightweight to dare. Such a pity.

Whatever tweetie. If I want tedious, uncritical, mainstream rhetoric all I
have to do is to turn on the tele or pick up an establishment daily. We're
swamped with this bull as it is and your postings are hardly a revelation -
nor do I feel it's worth charging into a debate with you as you convey such
opinions as you've adopted with such an admirable clarity that nobody should
have any cause for confusion as regards the essence of your weltanschauung -
I mean, what could there possibly be to debate? But I'm far more interested
in enlisting in something that is stimulating and perhaps insightful,
something that doesn't leave me so intellectually starved that I start
sounding like the archives of the NY Times - this is my reason for being on
this list... I might wonder what yours could be. And yes, an intellectual
lightweight I surely am, but still sufficiently bright to recognise myself
as such, and sufficiently daring to confess to my failings. Finally, if
you'd been around this list a little longer you'd not be doubting whether I
ever become involved in debate - it's just that I reserve it for times and
issues that are, for (little) me, of consequence. Sorry to disappoint.

respectfully

b

bruce sandford
Hamilton 2001
Aotearoa - New Zealand

ICQ: 20816964