On 14 Jul 2005 13:08:35 -0700, the opaque "Charlie Self"
clearly wrote:

Larry Jaques wrote:
After reading her "balanced and neutral reporting", the odds appear
fairly high that Georgina Gustin is a tree-hugging liberal.

The fact that the living tree might be worth a lot of money in timber
never got covered by the newspaper. I wonder why. (No I don't.) sigh


Nonsense Larry. Not many sawmills are going to want to cut a tree that
stands next to a parking lot of any kind. Too, there's no knowing
what's inside that "200 year old" tree without a look at it, at least.
It could be about half rotted or it could be perfect.

True, but we haven't seen any of those estimates.


It's also quite possible the reporter, like many people, does not look
at a tree as a valuable resource, or, really, has any idea it could be.

Yeah, they probably see it as either a temple or a stack of firewood.
Sad, ain't it?


But you know the answer: the reporter was out to get the preacher.

Hey, I'm usually the one railing -against- religion. But my read of
that story was that the guy was trying to find ways to save the tree
since the townfolk had put up such an uproar.


Not everyone is a wood expert, or interested in becoming one. For that
matter, why didn't the pastor check into the possible value of the
tree? If he did, he didn't bother to mention it. Should we extrapolate
and say he was going for a double payment because it wasn't mentioned?

The guy comes across as a horse's ass based on his words and actions,
and you guys blame the reporter.

Ever stop to think it might have been the reporter's calculated
wording which made it sound like the preacher was an ass? Reread
that story and show me her balance. ANY balance or openmindedness.
It didn't give her question, only his answer. Much is hidden in that
story, I'm sure, and it felt awfully one-sided.


Jesus wept.

??


- - -
Brain cells come and brain cells go, but fat cells live forever.
---
http://diversify.com Website Application Programming for YOU!