>My basic position on Buchanan/Fulani/Perot
>is shoot the messenger, figuratively speaking,
>but take a good part of the message seriously.
Why shoot the messenger if the message is worth taking seriously? Or,
alternatively, is there no relation at all between messenger and
message? And in Buchanan's case, isn't he the author rather than the
messenger?
Doug
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
PB has hijacked a left issue. He's not an author but a plagiarist. Fulani is simply certifiable. The relationship between messenger and message is that these messengers have recognized a good thing before much of the left.
mbs