     (Eric Roush) writes...




Funny.  I didn't realize Mr. Tanner brought up Bob Knepper v. Pam Postema
in the first place.  Thought it was someone named Jacobs.


Why?  If a statement is truly idiotic, and is universally thought so,
the challenge is a waste of panting.  Further, challenges that have
nothing (yes, nothing) to do with *baseball* are wasting others' time.

You got a problem with what Bob Knepper thinks?  Let's hear it, in
some sort of categorical manner.  (Actually, I question whether either
Knepper or Postema aren't "old news" at this point, although what I
have read of Postema's book is interesting.)


I agree this far.


Sez you.


That does not come out in what you say down the road, here.


Yo.  Even elementary school children have had access to our postings,
albeit in an edited form.  You want them to hear you talk like this?
Don't you want people who come to this group to talk baseball to think
you like to do the same?  Or do you want them to think you're some 
politically correct demagogue who's oh-so sensitive?  (Ho-hum.)

Plus, you're here limiting free speech to "some obscure newsgroup that
I don't read."  What BS.  You got a problem with what Jacobs says, what
Knepper thinks, all you have to do is defeat it with better ideas, more
and better speech.  Yours is the easy way out.

As for Knepper: ever notice how sometimes these guys will say just about
any darn thing that pops in their heads when a mike is shoved in front of
them?  You know that often the best copy for the news is the one that isn't
pre-prepared.  They know Knepper has controversial ideas about women, they
pop some question about Postema.  (An interesting related question would 
be whether the two ever appeared in the same game.  Off the top of my head,
I guess "no."  If my guess is right, Knepper popped off about something that
had nothing to do with him -- and Postema gets a book for it, and he doesn't.)


Now, why didn't *I* think of that?  :-)  :-)  :-)

RG