Yes, Fred, I understood that you were talking about the same incident with CarolC. I made the distinction because CarolC seemed at one point to have forgotten that she had addressed me on the matter directly. So when I talked about the Human Rights thing, she said:

"I did not suggest that you aren't for human rights. What I said, and what I've been criticized by Fred Miller for saying, is that I can't speak for you about weather or not you are for human rights, that only you can say whether or not you are for human rights."

Fine, but in my original post I had said "I trust that both of us support Human Rights"; this was in fact what she was responding to. How could I have said this if I myself did not support Human Rights? The only sense I could make of her later comments was that she had forgotten that it all began with a statement by me that I supported human rights and would assume she did too.

This context makes the faulty logic of the whole "I can't speak for you" thing pretty transparent, too. I obviously was not asking anyone to speak for me, as I had already spoken for myself.

Brucie, I agree with you about CarolC, too. It's the low-level insults that she apparently does not mean, but that many of us feel, that got us off on this line. But in general, she's a fighter for what she believes in, and that's always inpressive.