re: Antioxidants

Rick Knight (
Mon, 23 Jun 97 10:45:22 CST

Eric Watt Forste <>
Subject: Re: Free speech vs. big money spin

Rick Knight wrote:
> I don't really associate "free speech" with a multi-billion dollar
> industry's ability to exercise it sensibly, with conscience or any
> other motive than how much money they can make off their product.

Eric Watt Forste responds:
Yeah, the motives of legislators and bureaucrats are so much nobler
and purer than the motives of businessmen, we'd better make sure they
have veto power over what gets said. I'd much rather be brainwashed by
Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich than by Hugh Hefner or Bill Gates,
wouldn't you?

(Hint: I'm being sardonic.)

Rick replies:

Really? I couldn't detect! <G>

But, seriously, your point is...? Actually, I see your point but it
doesn't sway my opinion. Business and Politics are made of an
amalgamation of types of people, not all self-serving/interest-serving
a**holes, and certainly not all trusted altruistic saints.

Interesting stats in the LA Times this weekend after the announcement
about the coffin nail industry deal ($368 billion). Number of deaths
related to tobacco yearly, 400,000+. Alcohol? 100,000+. Sexually
transmitted diseases and motor vehicles were down in the 20s and 30s
(and who knows how much alcohol factors into those numbers). The
chasm is profound between addiction-related substances and other
mundane human endeavors with the typical cursory amount of risk.

As far as trusting Bill Gates, Hugh Hefner, Clinton, Newt, or Captain
Kangaroo, we each choose the story by the best spin doctor and decide
on our comfort level. It could possibly be all smoke and mirrors for
the working class to keep us distracted and/or entertained. So what'll
it be, sh*t or chocolate-covered sh*t?

Jaded but not hopeless in S.F. and the weather's decent. Today life
is good.