Dear Michelle Hadden:
Nancy Gish was responding to Peter Montgomery's "put on blackface, etc."
remark and not John Ryskamp's call for revolution in California.  If you
find nothing offensive in that remark, or cannot conceive how someone
within the standard range of sensitivities would be able to find it
offensive, then all's the pity.

I also take exception with your remark about Nancy's posts.  There is
"nice"--we Minnesotans are expert at practicing it, protecting the
well-meaning from faux pas of various sorts. I believe Nancy's posts
have been tactful and to the point when correcting some statement that
she knows to be erroneous, pointing the writer in the direction of books
and articles where s/he can check on the matter.  But there is the quite
different problem of responding to a lack of human decency, especially
an egregious one, and more especially an egregious one that is clung to.
The rules of "nice" need not apply there.

J. P. Earls, OSB
St. John' University
Collegeville, MN  56321

-----Original Message-----
From: Michelle Hadden [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 9:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Some language is beyond the pale

nancy, i for one hope that you are.
i find nothing here offensive other
than your reaction, and you should
be the first to talk.  the majority
of your posts to this list are
incredibly abusive, even if they
are couched in pretty, academic


--- Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Peter,
> This is the most offensive message ever posted on this list in
> the time I
> have been on it.  Have you no idea what you are saying?  Do
> you think
> that ludicrous icon masks or mitigates it?
> I hope I am not the only one who finds this astonishingly
> unacceptable.
> Nancy
> Date sent:              Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:46:37 -0800
> Send reply to:          "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum."
> <[log in to unmask]>
> From:                   Peter Montgomery
> <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject:                Re: Watch out for the economy
> To:                     [log in to unmask]
> From: John Ryskamp
> You should worry less about differences between parties and
> start
> worrying that your economy, like the American, is about to
> fall apart.
> Here in California the State budget deficit is publicly stated
> to be $21
> billion. But do you know what the whisper number is?  SIXTY
> billion, and
> growing rapidly. Come about February you will see how bad it
> really is.  I
> suppose a lot of people on this thread are tenured
> professors--well, these
> are the folks they're talking about cutting here, even at
> prestigious
> Berkeley. You shouldn't get caught unaware by this--you're
> never really
> told how bad it is going to get, you have to ferret it out of
> people who
> have reason to know how revenues and sales are really doing:
> California is
> a disaster area, and if California sinks, America drowns (and
> Britain
> never had a chance). Start agitating for rights that will keep
> you in your
> housing regardless of what happens to the economic situation
> or your own
> economic situation.   Enuf bout Eliot--aux armes!
> ================================================ Yes
> Mark. And what do you
> do for an encore? Put on black face paint with white lips, and
> roll around
> on your bum?
> ;->
> Cheers,
> Peter