 | | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
(...) Oh I'd love to have a black/white, right/wrong stance as clear and simplistic as the one you're proposing, Larry. But the world's a complex place, which needs complex problem solving--there is nothing cut 'n dry in life. So when I say that I (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
(...) Red/Green-- When tested, on a scale of CV (colour vision) 1-5, 1 being not colour blind and 5 being total colourblind, I'm a CV 3, which means I could have been a chef or such in the armed forces--I could not be a scuba diver (which I wanted (...) (22 years ago, 28-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Debunking "Arming America"
|
|
I seem to recall that we may have had some discussion here on the book "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture" by Michael Bellesiles although I could not find a relevant post. At any rate it puts forth the thesis that "guns were (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
(...) alive. (...) Ok now I am really confused on why you support gun control. I mean you do know that the crime rate in Canada has almost doubled since the nation wide Gun Control laws went into effect right? Sure it is still a lot lower than the (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: (selective snipping for comedic effect) (...) But if the way you see them *is* black and white, wouldn't that measn....? ;-) -->Bruce<-- (red/green? total? My right eye sees redder and my left (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
Snippety Snip... (...) followed by... (...) What was your stance on guns again??? I think I missed something. You're ready to go vigilante on a serial killer but not support ousting someone (1) who killed hundreds of thousands (or, if you go by the (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes: <snip> (...) In answer to a few other points made... (URL) out the 'toon at the bottom of this page... It has been said that I'm morally 'wishy washy'. I think that, given a cut 'n dry scenario, I am (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
(...) Well, I didn't want to get into it deeply for I didn't see the actual interview, and am only going by what has been said here, as well as the links posted. But if true, I don't think I'd string Dan up on the nearest branch--rather I'd do (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
(...) "Oh well"... "A shame"... ??? Is that the best you can do, Dave? One could argue that this interview(1) was "aiding and comforting the enemy", assuming Saddam's our enemy specifically(2). This interview(1) is a perfect example of what's wrong (...) (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Dan Rather is a Useful Idiot Extraordinare
|
|
(...) <snip> (...) Depends on your POV-- to Saddam it was like hitting the jackpot. (Hence my post). JOHN (22 years ago, 27-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
