>Michael Hirsch:
>
>> The discussion here has been about what is alleged to
>> be in Fitch's book, not about his articles, "specious"
>> or otherwise
>
>Incorrect. I have formed my impressions of Fitch based on his articles,
>including the one where he claimed that home care workers aren't real
>workers. When I voiced doubts about the need to take him seriously based on
>those, I was told, "read the book." That doesn't make sense to me. David
>Horowitz is insisting that everyone read his screed "The Professors" before
>pointing out that he's a frothing-at-the-mouth, red-baiting lunatic; why
>should that be a requirement when there's plenty of evidence for it in his
>other published writings?
>
>So that was my point.
Doesn't it embarrass you to be commenting on a book on the basis of an excerpt from an article that you're not even representing fairly?
Guess not.
Doug