Email address obfuscation in effect -- please
click here to turn it off.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Mike Miller wrote:
OK, so you sent the wrong URL last time. Saying "you should expect him
to follow the letter of the law in this kind of situation" is not the
same thing as saying "it's not the spirit of the law that matters, it's
the letter." I never said that, nor would I say that. Seeing it, my
first question is "matters to what?" What does that mean?
There was nothing wrong with the first set of URLs.
How exactly are the two statements different? In that thread you state,
at the very lest, a non-concern regarding one illegal act, yet you
condemn W for what remains to be decided as an illegal act. You deny
that perjury is corruption and tell me to look it up. Well, perhaps you
should follow some of your own advice:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=corrupt
"to become morally debased" seems to fit the bill pretty succintly.
And all this on the *opinion* that W sent us to war on bad intelligence,
even though there was corroboration of that evidence from other nations.
Then why would I be writing about it? Of course I care about it!
Perhaps you could tell me.
You vacillate back and forth...
Between what and what?
Your moral judgments of others.
...whenever it's convenient to your ideology every bit as much as you
accuse the right-wingers of doing.
Sorry, I don't have an ideology. You really need to wake up to what is
going on here. The Bush supporters on this list are *all* trying to
promote Christianity. That has nothing to do with our government. They
are ideological. To evaluate Bush and decide that he sucks, or worse,
is not ideological.
You know, you react pretty extremely when you feel that people are
putting words in your mouth, yet you do it freely. How in the hell do
you justify saying that the "Bush supporters on this list are *all*
trying to promote Christianity"? You point a finger at them for
espousing their beliefs, yet feel that somehow you remain pure for doing
the same thing.
You seem to be saying that I am "a liberal." I don't even really know
what the hell that is, so I would never say that I am one.
While I do believe you to be quite liberal, that's not what I said. If
you'd left it in context and actually read it, that'd be more obvious.
Me too. Once you get one, tell me about it. For now I only get two
viable choices in the elections I've been voting in. That's why I vote
for Democrats -- they aren't the Republicans.
At this point, Kinky Friedman would be my choice for President, but I
voted for Perot too...I have a soft spot for sh*t starters...
As far as voting for the lesser of two evils, I simply refuse to do that
anymore. I'm not buying another Windows box, and I'm not voting for
someone I don't want to vote for.
Then why not just shut up? You waste a lot of time putting words in my
mouth and accusing me of taking certain vague positions (being "a
liberal" or whatnot). What's the point? Why not write about the topic
instead of writing about me? If you agree with me, then you should be
passionate about doing something about the problems.
Mike
You have the same delete key I have, and are quite welcome to use it.
Most days, I read your posts and move on...some days, I feel the need to
respond. Today, I respond.
Rick
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion
Home | FAQ | Server | Presentations | Mailing Lists/Archives | Member Tools | Links | Sponsors | Contact