[lbo-talk] Possible Bright Side?

R rhisiart at charter.net
Mon Nov 15 16:55:21 PST 2004


At 03:22 PM 11/14/2004, you wrote:
>R wrote:
>
>>hi doug: i didn't know you were a fan of the WTO steel import agreement,
>
>I thought Bush's steel tariffs sucked, and to hold that up as a model of
>progressive economic policymaking is a bad mistake.

shrub's steel tariffs probably did suck; so does the WTO and the IMF.

i think the author was trying to offset the clinton/gore style and the shrub style rather than state either is, or was, progressive. any fool knows, there's nothing progressive about the shrub group, or clinton. overall, it appears the author succeeded. also, the emphasis seems to be on the continuation of policy at several levels from one administration -- dem or repub -- to another, no matter how bad the policy is.


>>there's a meaningful difference between a punch and a counterpunch. since
>>you find sports boring and have no idea what it is, you might ask a
>>friend who understands boxing to explain it.
>
>As I understand it, a counterpunch is a punch delivered in reply to an
>attacking punch. It's still a punch.
>
>Doug

it's a bit more subtle than that: a dollar and a dime are both money, but not equivalent. a reply to an attack must be timed and accurate to be effective. it involves taking advantage of an opening left by a thrown punch. it's a quick return, tending to take the strength out of an opponent's attack when executed properly.

similar to a riposte in fencing.

since we're doing boxing 101, there's a difference between boxing styles of "punchers" and "boxers" which is too detailed to go into here.

a punch by any other name is not a punch.

R


>___________________________________
>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list