Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: WFTR
Did this guy condemn the Clinton administration for its treatment of Billy Dale? I hope so.

I am "this guy" (I am the author of the essay which opens this thread; I happen to be a professional writer) and yes, I was quite vocal - on this forum and a couple of others, when the occasion arose - in condemning the Clinton Administration's treatment of Billy Dale. Come to think of it, I was usually pretty vocal in condemning the Clinton Administration, period. But precisely what Billy Dale's treatment by the Clintonistas has to do with Pete Rose's by Giamatti's successors (it wasn't, for one thing, Giamatti or his successors who got Pete Rose in trouble with the tax man, nor did Pete Rose's trouble with the tax man involve his gambling) escapes me for the moment...
22 posted on 07/26/2002 7:23:33 PM PDT by BluesDuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: BluesDuke
I happen to be a professional writer

I find that to be an understatement.

26 posted on 07/26/2002 7:27:06 PM PDT by hole_n_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: BluesDuke
But precisely what Billy Dale's treatment by the Clintonistas has to do with Pete Rose's by Giamatti's successors (it wasn't, for one thing, Giamatti or his successors who got Pete Rose in trouble with the tax man, nor did Pete Rose's trouble with the tax man involve his gambling) escapes me for the moment...

The connection is that in your original piece you said that the people would condemn the government if it treated citizens the way that baseball treated Pete Rose. The fact is that the government has treated people much worse than baseball treated Mr. Rose, but the people never condemned the government and specifically Bill Clinton in any meaningful way. I should have written my post more carefully to express that I disagreed with your statement about the people's reaction to unjust government rather than suggesting that you failed to criticize Clinton. For that mistake, I apologize. My point was that "the people's" moral outrage over true injustices is not what it once was. I have mixed feelings about the Pete Rose situation, but even if I supported him completely, I wouldn't look to our current culture to care.

In any case, I thought the article was interesting and well-written overall. Again, it wasn't my intention to be insulting but only to point out how much that one statement struck me as overly optimistic about our society's ability to feel moral outrage over true injustice. Congrats on being able to maintain a career as a professional writer. I like to dabble, but I'll probably never quite make it.

WFTR
Bill

32 posted on 07/26/2002 7:52:32 PM PDT by WFTR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson