 | | Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
| (...) Appropriate? Don't know if I use that word. Listen, most of the news churned out by the media is pure pulp. Think Hollywood. I couldn't care less about a star's private life; in fact, the less I know about it, the better for them, because I (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | CD instructions
|
| Hello I'm JAC, My last modell, is another truck, yet. And, I like to have more informations of my MOC, to built another one easely. Before, I took a lot of photos, but, this time, I create a CD informations, and I propose to sell someone. You can (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
| | | | | Test
|
| Hi, just to see, if my message go well (21 years ago, 7-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.test)
| | | | | Re: The Guardian unworthy of toilet paper?
|
| (...) Hey, something just occurred to me. With your above statement in mind, would you say that it is appropriate or inappropriate to have a citizen's private extramarital affair dragged through the media for months on end? Just curious... As (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Bennett IS unworthy of being used as toilet paper
|
| (...) Because he is neither the idiot nor the racist he's painted to be. (...) Fair enough. (...) Well, yes, because I know of him and know his politics, and so I know that the charges against him are baseless. As far as "defending Bennett to get at (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Bennett IS unworthy of being used as toilet paper
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: s to say it. (...) I doubt it. He chose a racist example to make his point. (...) He didn't he have an inkling? Okay, he is an idiot then. Racist, idiot: I don't see why you would bother to defend either. (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Bennett IS unworthy of being used as toilet paper
|
| (...) -snippity snip snip- (...) This is the part that is making everyone upset. Bennett is saying that blacks are a large source of crime, and is linking "criminality" to "blackness." He IS using reducio ad absurdum, but he is using it on the issue (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Can this guy get any more infuriating???
|
| (URL) Bush, in a high-profile address on Thursday, said the global fight against terrorism must continue in Iraq because it is where terrorists are centering their war on humanity. "We're facing a radical ideology with an unalterable objective, to (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate) !
| | | | | Re: Bennett IS unworthy of being used as toilet paper
|
| (...) They won't say it because it is patently absurd, just as Bennett was arguing reductio ad absurdum. (...) ???!! I'm sleighed, -->Bruce<-- (...) Come on! You seriously can't think that Bennett had any inkling that this action was anything but (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Screw Abstinence?
|
| (...) Yes but in the context of this argument it is irrelevant whether or not the implicit support also applies to other things, in a debate on abortion it is the stance on abortion that is most important. That said, I somewhat agree with bringing (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
