My last diary I wrote an open letter to Jeff Sweet.
He replied.
Bored as hell? Nothin' better to read?
My letter: http://www.dailykos.com/...
Mr. Sweet's reply:
Well, this is the longest and most-detailed articulation of your thoughts. And some of it is provocative and interesting, and some of it is like tossing coins across the ice, sliding in every which way.
I don't think you've established any correlation between the craft precepts one embraces to write a play and ones political persuasions, if that was your desire.
And I don't think you've established a conspiracy. Rather you've established an anti-Conventionalist habit, inertia if you will. If early in our history some group had effectively used this tool, it would have been established in our national DNA, just as John Marshall established that the Supreme Court had the right to declare the constitutionality of legislation early in our history. Imagine if that hadn't been established and more than two hundred years had gone by and suddenly the Court had decided to invoke that power.
We disagree on a few things. You say the problem isn't the Bush administration, and I would say the problem isn't exclusively the Bush administration. I would say, though, that the Bush administration is a mighty big problem in that they've embraced lawlessness as a working philosophy and the Congress and the courts have been slow to challenge these actions properly. I see some sign of life and outrage, finally. The Court slamming the administration on the enforcement of environmental oversight and the Congress, on both sides of the aisle, expressing contempt for Gonzalez and seeking his removal, as well as howling about the recess appointment of Fox. A Republican senator has openly speculated on the case for impeachment, which is a welcome thing.
But, you know, I just don't want to get into a long extended argument with you on where I don't agree with you. I've got obligations as a teacher, a playwright, a journalist and a companion to a very patient lady to pay attention to, and these supercede my obligation or inclination to pursue this. I see no particular benefit to using my time this way, except exercising a few muscles.
You've said what you want to say and those people with the patience to read all of it will either assent or not. If any choose to join your call to action as a Conventionalist, well, maybe it will have proven to be worth your effort.
Best,
Jeff
Back in high school my sister was on the debate team. I went to one once. I think it goes: premise, reply, rebuttal. Something like that.
That means I have to write a rebuttal.