Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cholula.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!teltone!tikal!cholula!tac
From: tac@cholula.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Reagan's Remark
Message-ID: <10@cholula.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 20-Aug-84 12:16:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: cholula.10
Posted: Mon Aug 20 12:16:50 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 21-Aug-84 03:31:03 EDT
Organization: Teltone Corp., Kirkland, WA
Lines: 60

, (sop to the blank line eaters--consider it a religious sacrifice)

The commentary about Reagan's "bombing" remark is carrying on with
a certain amount of rhetoric.  I would like to comment on this subject
also.

RR's remark has been characterized as a number of things.  I have
chosen to think of it as an ice breaking comment.  You may (and will)
interpret it in any way that you want, but let me explain the reasoning
behind my choice.

The remark was made to a room of consenting adults who were supposedly
endowed with intelligence.  They were about to engage in the purpose
of their assembly, which purpose can cause a certain amount of tension.
To whit, a press conference.  The conference had not started.  The
President's remark began, I believe--I don't have hard copy in front
of me--with the phrase, "Ladies and gentlemen, I have just signed
legislation outlawing Russia."  The assembled personages in the room
were all familiar with the workings of the US congress, and had full
knowledge of what Congress had been working on of late.  They KNEW
beyond any doubt that such legislation had not been touched by congress
and therefore, they knew that the statement was not true.  They never
questioned the validity of the statement.  There was never any question
in anyone's mind that this was or was not non-sense.  Since the press
conference had not begun, there was no way that the comment could have
been construed as meant for the population.

Now, admittedly, I am not the President.  I also am not in any position
of power.  I would not, however, look kindly on anyone who spread what
I said in a closed room to people to whom it might be offensive.  How
many of you out there have never told a joke that could be considered
offensive to some minority group?  Would you like to have the people
you told a joke like that to run out and tell the minority group that
you had said thus-and-such about them?  I am not trying to justify
the remark, I think it was in poor taste (I believe in GENERIC jokes).
I also think that spreading the comment is close to criminal (in the
non-legal sense) incompetence.  This is not news and refusing to spread
it is not suppression of the news, just smart.  Of course, the press
"intelligencia" of this country would probably report number, size and
color of the President's stools each day if they could get it.  Now
you can go back to interpreting the "remark" in whatever (commie-
pinko-liberal vs jerkwater-redneck-conservative) political manner you
wish, just don't bother me with flames about it.


From the Soapbox of
Tom Condon     {...!uw-beaver!teltone!teldata!tac}
                                                              o
Don't bother heaping abuse on me, the pile already has       ooo
pyramidal proportions and any more added just rolls         ooooo  <==abuse
down the sides and off!  It then forms piles for others    ooooooo
to walk in.                                                  tac   <==me
					piles of                    
					abusive  =====>   .       . 
					overflow         ...     ... 

DISCLAIMER:  The opinions expressed herein are those of everyone who
  matters, but not necessarily anyone you know, and most certainly not
  my employers!