X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.0-r431796 Sender: -2.6 (spamval) -- NONE Return-Path: Received: from newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) by boston.eecs.umich.edu (8.12.10/8.13.0) with ESMTP id kA9Lq08W002733 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 16:52:01 -0500 Received: from galaxyquest.mr.itd.umich.edu (mx.umich.edu [141.211.176.134]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kA9Lpv8U011720; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 16:51:57 -0500 Received: FROM newman.eecs.umich.edu (newman.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.11]) BY galaxyquest.mr.itd.umich.edu ID 4553A2F9.54D4A.5706 ; 9 Nov 2006 16:51:53 -0500 Received: from kepler.eecs.umich.edu (kepler.eecs.umich.edu [141.213.4.81]) by newman.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kA9LppMw011692 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 9 Nov 2006 16:51:51 -0500 Received: from kepler.eecs.umich.edu (localhost.eecs.umich.edu [127.0.0.1]) by kepler.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.1/8.13.0) with ESMTP id kA9Lpo3S003883; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 16:51:50 -0500 Received: from localhost (klochner Æ localhost) by kepler.eecs.umich.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) with ESMTP id kA9LpoRL003880; Thu, 9 Nov 2006 16:51:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <56e157e80611090727m65a89588w998d3d73470e3f04 Æ mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <56e157e80611090727m65a89588w998d3d73470e3f04 Æ mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.0-r431796 (2006-08-16) on newman.eecs.umich.edu X-Virus-Scan: : UVSCAN at UoM/EECS X-Virus-Scan: : UVSCAN at UoM/EECS Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 16:51:50 -0500 (EST) To: Christine Kapusky cc: improvetheworld Æ umich.edu From: Kevin Lochner Subject: Re: Please write a counter-essay Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 861 It's by Raymond S. Kraft, the author of greats pieces like "The New York Times, Public Enemy Number One". At any rate, here's a rebuttal I found on the web: http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/rebuttal_to_raymond_kraft.htm