 | | Re: What's worse--being a moron or being corrupt?
|
|
(...) I would say being labeled a moron is far better than being labeled corrupt. (...) Why stop with Dubya? We should get rid of the whole lot and reinstate the constitution as our basis of government. (You know where everyone follows the same (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | A Change
|
|
.A Change ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯ (Not so much a` BIG change, but a `SMALL improvement!) !An open letter to the Lugnet community and it’s creators: I'm proposing that a change take place in our lovely Lugnet community. Not a radical revolution, but simply just a (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions, lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.people, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.curators, lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | What's worse--being a moron or being corrupt?
|
|
So a Canadian Parliamentary aide called Dubya a 'moron' a while back, and that sent everyone into a tizzy. Now the Mayor of London says Dubya's corrupt: (URL) would you rather be--labeled as a moron or labeled corrupt? I, like the mayor of London, (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Canada's Senate Woes--R: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
So I did a little googling (what a wonderful thing that is...) Found this little article: (URL) basically lays out what our senate is today, and what certain reformers want, i.e. EEE Senate--elected being part of that. but, as the author also (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) The Party that has the most seats in the house are 'in power', and the party in Power has the PM--PM's are voted on by the party. The senate in Canada, on the other hand, are appointees. When a seat becomes vacant, whichever PM is in power (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
!!! (...) I thought that in a parlimentary type government like in Canada and many European countries, the Prime Minister and the parliment are from the same party (unless no one has a majority and then there is a coalition) Lester (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) What do those scenarios have to do with what actually happen? If you are implying that the gang will forcibly drive customers away, then that is a straw man argument (thar ya go, John) since the Christian Right is saying that they are only (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) I rather liked it. You'll note the Pastor had no problems with guns in Wal-Mart; it was the woman’s lingerie that he felt did not belong in a family store. ;) Scott A (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) <nodding, a la Wayne> Good one. JOHN (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
Here's a tangent on this topic-- (URL) which one of our more esteemed ward councillors in the Big Smoke is in a wee bit of a tizzy against an advert. Seems that "Nellie Pedro, a Toronto District School Board trustee" doesn't like a commercial made (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) Well, if it isn't coercion, I'd like it defined. How is this different from a gang-like group walking into "Mom-n-Pop Hair Salon" and telling them "Pay up or you'll start losing money?" Well, that's a little extreme and called extortion, so (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) Except, perhaps, a Democrat President? Cheers Richie Dulin (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | What the...?!
|
|
The New Yorker, The Talk of theTown, DEPT. OF CONNECTIONS "THE CONTRACTORS" (URL) there is a new and demonstrable connection, but it is not the kind that the Bush Administration had in mind. In fact, it is more likely to fuel the speculations of (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Newsbits: The Lies and Profits Continue
|
|
"Halliburton has wider Iraq role" (URL) Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), who asked for more details on the Halliburton contract, said, "It now appears ... that the contract with Halliburton -- a company with close ties to the administration -- can (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) How much it's different? Not sure I follow. Burning books, well do you mean me burning my books? If I do so safely and in a place permitted to do so (my property) that's free speech, I'm making a statement about the books. Or do you mean jack (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: WMD: Yes or No?
|
|
(...) The 'smoking gun', as it were... The truck was cleaned with bleach so they can't find any traces of bio weapons. Let's find the flaw in that logic-- "Hey Iraqi Official 1--The Americans are going to invade--we want to show that we weren't (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) Why post stupid things like that? You leave the impression that that actually occured. JOHN (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: WMD: Yes or No?
|
|
(...) Patience is a virtue: (URL) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) I don't think so. I attacked the quotation. *He* transferred my attack and applied to the author himself (whom I don't even know). That wasn't my point. (...) I think the coined phrase is "fictitious";-) (...) Of course. That is the way it (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: One more reason why I'm refusing to shop in Wal*Mart
|
|
(...) Sorry Dave, but that's not the point. Doesn't matter *who* they were just so long as they're Wal*Mart customers. Wal*Mart SHOULD be responding to their customer's demands. It's just that (and I agree here) those demands are stupid. Should (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
