[Texas2step]

Claiming that there's no relevant connection between "activism" and the issue that the activists seek to address is an adolescently specious argument that blemishes your credibility.

If you'll bother to go back and read my posts again, I didn't make the claim that "there is no relevant connection between "activism" and the issue activist seek to address".

I made the observation that these guys were throwing a party, one you were not invited to, and you crashed it, rudely. If you're going to crash someone else's party, then be nice about it. If you're going to be arguementative, do it on the threads where such topics are being discussed, not threads created for organizational purposes.

I ask you again. What was your motivation for posting that particular comment? If it was not in alignment with the objective of the thread (organizing activism) then you butted in where you were not welcome and I maintain you should have refrained from posting that comment.

If you cannot grasp this "adolescently specious" fact, not my problem. The only blemish to my credibility may be in your specific perception, which causes me no distress whatsoever.

[Willie Green]

If you'll bother to go back and read my posts again, I didn't make the claim that "there is no relevant connection between "activism" and the issue activist seek to address".

If anybody wants to bother to read your posts again, they'll quickly realize that's a disingenuous claim.

I ask you again. What was your motivation for posting that particular comment?

A simple reminder to nonpartisan activists who are sincerely interested in the jobs issue that a substantive economic policy is necessary for credibility. Neither major party candidate has such credibility on this issue.