To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *17871 (-20)
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) "no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more that two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of President more that once." (...) I guess that's (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) <snip> I really don't know if I should post this link, first of all 'cause of the bad language factor, and it has to do with a little video game I play (yeah, my other hobby that takes (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) OK, stand in front of a mirror and say "Scott's santimonious self-righteousness" three times fast. (...) "n", "m"... Sound about the same and not a lot of difference pictorially(1). Just one hump. And whats just one hump between friends, I ask (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: A bounty on spammers
 
(...) I didn't read all the way through. Does it say how it's going to handle off shore SPAM? Most of the SPAM I receive fits into one of three categories: - e-mail from services I've signed up for (i.e. not really SPAM) - off shore - notifications (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) Actually, that's how it started. I even pointed out that many of my answers were hardly serious, or not even necessarily my own viewpoint. I just thought Scott's santimonious self-righteousness need a bit of puncturing. (...) Tymbrimi. No "n". (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) I suppose it is obvious to everyone except Scott, but I'm not defending U.S. actions to any particular degree, I'm just objecting to Scott's axe-grinding and one-sided presentations. And I'm a liberal! I hate Bush. I don't like Israel's (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> (...) <snip> (...) I agree!! Dave K -who is making his manilla folder bigger by the minute! (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) If you're a Tymbrini, there's got to be a practical joke coming here soon before we get to the denoument of this thread. :-) I can hardly wait! Speaking of practical jokes, did you ever notice that "Tymbrini" contains "Brin"? That has to have (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) Notice how you never answer questions? That you just shift to a new attack? Iraq is not a destablizing force? Just say yes or no for once, and *then* append your explanations instead of this constant dodging. (...) Actually, yes, but not as (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) Hey, "He who mentions Hitler first has lost the argument". Go right ahead! :-) Scott, c'mon. Stop and look at your answer. Here I accuse you of grinding an axe against the United States, and all you do is try to sharpen it further. Who do you (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) You zany understator! Ignoring for a moment the question of the polling machines (ie, modern, well-maintained machines in largely republican districts and archaic, run-down machines in largely democratic districts) I don't have the info in (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) It all boils down to how many lives would have been saved/lost, and what value you put on them. If OBL comes back to annoy us, that will have to be put in the equation too. As will any moderate Muslim backlash. How many Afghan lives is 1 (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) Whoa, calm your jets there Chris--my whole post was rather in a humourous vein and was light hearted... I know your issues for your fractured voting system. I seem to recall that after the Florida fiasco, that someone went back and recounted, (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) How so? There was an election, the results were certified, challenged in court, and allowed to let stand. You may not agree with all the various court decisions made by various courts(1) but it's a bit of a stretch to say he was appointed, ne? (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) Depends how he handles Desert Storm II; the first propaganda exercise didn't win a re-election for Dad (though the rest of his cabinet was reinstated in 2000, of course). Here's a puzzle for the Constitutionally-aware among us: Since W was (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) That, and that this was apparently the action of a local law enforcement officer... (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) "Another term"?!? We didn't even vote him in for a SINGLE term! Dave! Comin' at ya from behind the chain link fence! (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) You aren't listening! We didn't vote him in in the first place. Surely in his current position, he will be able to rig the vote using even more convincing tactics. We'll have him for _at least_ another four years. (I wonder how much republican (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
 
(...) danger (...) about? (...) troops. (...) I wanted to insert a comment. I'm agreeing with Bruce by and large in this thread (because he doesn't _at all_ seem to be defending the US' naughtiness) but on this one point, I knew exactly what Scott (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
 
(...) btw, if I haven't said it yet... I do hope that you and your fellow citizens do not vote this person in for another term. Yeah, you're stuck with 'im for another few years but then "vote the incompotent iggit outta office!!--send 'im (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR