In a post today, Tom Mulhall claims that I actually agreed with his position on San Onofre based upon a few words he claims I wrote back on July 19 of this year.
The funny thing is, I cannot find those exact words anywhere on my blog (perhaps they are from an email or another forum), but yes, I did say that following the loss in the Fourth District Court of Appeal, I felt the NAC would better serve the naturist cause by returning to a grassroots effort, because I believed the appeal to the Supreme Court was futile, and I was right.
I HAVE ALWAYS SUPPORTED THE INITIAL NAC LAWSUIT AND HAVE SPOKEN LOUDLY AND OFTEN AGAINST AANR'S APPEASEMENT POLICY WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION.
You can go back and review everything I've written about the San Onofre case here.
Pulling a few words out of context is a patently dishonest way to engage in debate. I would hope that Tom would keep this exchange of ideas and positions on a higher level.
No comments:
Post a Comment