Liability insurance is not an answer

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

54. It's not difficult for me to question what I think before I say it.

There are those on both sides who are just playing follow the leader with our futures. Your remark yesterday about having "the integrity to admit being in error" turned on a light for me. There is value in validating one's perceptions and basic assumptions. "Weeding" the contradictions from among the fruitful and productive ideas let's call it. But also accepting and acknowledging that some who may share those ideas may have errant, invalid or selfish reasons for doing so.

Even more than the grant whores who (as far as I can tell) start with a conclusion and work backwards, I loathe the attention whores for simply looking to get their names in the news.

"Weeding" the Hemenways and Nugents is as valid as considering the source of a "fact". Making money from a book called "Ted, White and Blue" is a reason to distrust anything said there. My interpretation of what leaders have said, what history has shown and what the Founders and many though history sacrificed for is my fundamentally my own. To that end I acknowledge a dislike for Nugent and why he says what he says.

Heresy grows from a misunderstanding of the fundamental nature of the subject. I often find it impossible to get a firm pro-control person to define the nature and scope of a human right. I had special difficulty with a certain Canadian lawyer.