<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT SIZE=3>In a message dated 2/8/03 12:17:17 AM Central Standard Time, horton4jaz@earthlink.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">I, also, am an "entrepreneur who happens to be a 'Liberal'", according to<BR>
that Webster definition. But the title "liberal" has been taken over by the<BR>
most illiberal people around, just as the word "gay" has been taken over by<BR>
some people who don't meet Webster's definition of gay.</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
</FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
Good point about the word, 'gay.' Gay was a wonderful word that meant light and cheery or happy but now, of course, it has been distorted to mean a particular group of people. I wonder if there is anyway that the media could be persuaded to call homosexuals homosexuals and return ' gay' to its rightful and proper usage. Or is it hopeless and this charming word is lost forever.<BR>
<BR>
Jim Beebe</FONT></HTML>