Scott,

   You are new to the list. It is netiquette - just observe for awhile before you jump in. List members have established a rapport and it may not be obvious immediately. Attempting to establish the 13 fallacies of Logic on a list is ludicrous - you want to debate in form join debating organization. Rhetoric is associated with politcians - truth and politicians aren't even on a nodding aquaintance footing. Hence people's perception its a negative term. Apply some logic here.......  Its is a free country - that means folks get their opinion, and if it happens to vary from yours - that doesn't make it wrong just different. The same thing holds for defintions of words. 

                                                      Trisha

> Mr. Barber:
> 
> I made no assertion that you weren't polished in the truth, though I think
> your apparent belief that the word "rhetoric" conveys something negative
> reveals a misunderstanding of at least that term.  To be polished in
> rhetoric requires a knowledge of the truth.
> 
> I grow tired of partisian politics.  One should look up the term "Southern
> Democrat" before one starts blaming or crediting a party platform for this,
> that or any other thing.  The constituency we call "conservatives" today
> was, long ago, "Democratic," and vice versa, as Kat pointed out.  And to
> equate parties with ideologies like "conservative" or "liberal" nowadays is,
> in fact, akin to naming the middle of the road twice.  Who gets credit for
> ending segregation?  The people who suffered under it, Ken.  Not a party.
> They ended it, because THEY convinced enough people that they really were
> human, and that we really were stupid for not seeing it.
> 
> I find it strange that you feel the need to disparage the concept of
> "rhetoric" after I considered that your using it might mean you were
> complimenting Magenta for using her head.  Your comment about her heroes
> still attacked her person rather than considering her ideas rationally, and
> a friend would admit their wrongdoing and offer an apology -- which leads me
> to wondering whether your friendship is something I would value.
> 
> You're right, Ken.  I don't know you.  I never claimed to.  Right now, I'm
> not sure I want to.  I'm ready to be convinced otherwise when you are ready
> to convince me.
> 
> Scott
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: ken barber <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 6:31 PM
> Subject: Re: Addressing an ad-hominm and asking for welcome...
> 
> 
> >   i'd rather be unpolished in retoric than unpolished
> > in the truch.
> >    scott, welcome to the group. you and i will be
> > friends i am sure, we are just not off to a good
> > start.
> >    by the way, mag and i are friends. it is just that
> > we are blunt and to the point with each other. both of
> > us say what we mean and mean what we say. we are
> > oposite as north is from south, but, really are
> > friends. i don't expect her to change and she (i hope)
> > is not holding her breath for me to change.
> >
> > by the way, i agree that none of the 51 or 53 rebels
> > qualify. there were some important bills on the docket
> > that died while these bozos were in the state to the
> > north. some of those bobby had already told us about.
> > heros, not much.
> >
> > --- "BG Greer, PhD" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > Scott,
> > >
> > >        Wecome! you seem like a needed asset to this
> > > list. Most of us are
> > > "unpolished" at rhetoric! I am from Texas and just
> > > about all of my heroes are
> > > from Texas because I grew up here. None of the 53
> > > Democratic rebels qualify.
> > > I am speaking of Audie Murphy, my father and others.
> > >
> > > Bobby
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> > http://search.yahoo.com
> >