To the editor,
I am writing in response to Patrick Dodd’s letter which appeared in the Jan. 6 edition of the Call.
Mr. Dodd argues that Ms. Preuss never mentioned the Republican party in her letter and therefore the criticisms that I and many others issued were inaccurate.
He even went as far as to compare us to Michael Moore.
Mr. Dodd’s argument ignores many im-portant facts, the least of which is that humans beings are reasoning animals that are able to piece bits of information to-gether in order to draw conclusions. He states that Ms. Preuss’ letter never directly mentioned the Republican Party, so by inferring that she did was a lie. If you follow this logic, then one would have to conclude that Hitler never ordered the massacre of the Jews because he never mentioned the word “genocide” in his letter to Nazi leaders; he chose to discuss the “final solution” instead. Hitler chose his words carefully, but that does not change the underlying meaning of his orders.
Let me once again enlighten people to the subtle details of Ms. Preuss’ letter.
While she did not state that millions in other countries prayed for “Republicans,” she did state that those prayers were an-swered and Bush won the election — she mentioned him by name.
She also states that gays should go back in the closet and that schools should be forced to promote prayer and religious values.
Now, which political party has opposition to gay rights and the support of prayer in public venues written into its party platforms in states across the country? The Re-publican Party.
Does Mr. Dodd honestly believe that Ms. Preuss would be offended if she was called a conservative? Did she imply in her letter that she would support the Democratic Party and liberal values?
Finally, drawing conclusions from text — even if the author is not writing literally — is something that humans do all the time.
Doing so does not mean that they are twisting the truth like Michael Moore tends to do?
Your final comparison, Mr. Dodd, is un-fair and inaccurate.
Paul Stanley
Lemay
