Dave wrote:
You really don't understand the difference between a charity and these
associations, do you, Doug.

Maybe I do, maybe I don't. Obviously you feel the need for
an ad hominem attack at this point.

... I said was "A number of years ago, I
represented an association manager. She ran I don't
know how many associations, most of them created by her,"

Associations. Got that? Associations. Not charities.

Sure.
So why did you then go on to generalize that all such groups
were crooked shills?

... Things like the Long
Island Plumber's Association to make up an example. Nothing to do with
charities. Different beasts entirely. The ABA, AMA, AARP, etc. etc. are
_not_ charities.


Agreed. But *you* brought up the AMA and the AARP
specifically, and strongly insinuated (in not stated
outright) that these too were crooked shills engaged in
shoving a personal agenda down people's throats; and in a
rather huffy way said that they were run by people who are
not memebrs of the group(s) they represent; which is simply
not true.




Aren't AARP and the AMA civic organizations?


Definitely not. They don't even pretend to be, though you and perhaps others
seem to be badly confused on the point. They are organizations that purport
to operate to further the interest of their members, not the public
generally.

Uh huh. So let's quibble over terminology. They represent a
group of people and the leaders *are* members of that group
themselves.


... But in fact they generate much of their revenue by providing
vendors of various goods and services with access to their members

Yep. It's called "advertising." The Republican Party does
rather a lot of it these days.

.... and
further in substantial part the interests of their professional managers
rather than the interests of their members.


Got any proof of that? I already called you on who sets the
policy.

Does every law firm consist totally and solely of lawyers?
Does no law firm (or any association of lawyers) ever ever
hire a secretary to do the filing & telephoning, or an
accountant to handle the money? The company I work for (sort
of) has a lot of people who are not engineers, should it not
be allowed to call itself an engineering company?


Didn't you
specifically speak of charities? Maybe that was a different
thread? Please clarify.


I said nothing about charities until you threw that red herring into the
pot.

Not a red herring at all. More ad hominem, eh Dave?
Charities were specifically mentioned by others before I
ever posted to this thread.

DSK