Actually, it wasn't. Throughout my reading of the book, I labored under the illusion that it was meant to initiate discussion about public issues that needed resolution. Even more, I thought the introduction had indicated that your personal viewpoint was something you felt compelled to give as a matter of full disclosure, but which you intended to make a matter of secondary important in the interest of facilitating a fuller consideration and discussion of the issues. It seemed to me that you had intentionally presented that as the goal of the book, both because of your subtitle and by virtue of the way that you worded the introduction. So if I've gone into this discussion thinking that the point was to try to get some perspective not on what you believe, but rather what was at stake in the circumstances of current events, it's because it wasn't, to me, clear at the outset that you hadn't had that in mind. My apologies.