 | | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Thats my job. THIS poll was FLAWED!!! (URL) me) and my favorite question: Abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered art at all. man, i wish there was an option greater than STRONGLY AGREE I would have checked that (...) (17 years ago, 23-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) What a shock, so am I... giggle.... (URL) thing is, I took one of these before (but a completely different site) and my placement is almost exactly the same. Janey "Red Brick" (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Or "perfectly centered"? :-) Yeah, I was surprised, because I don't consider myself a "moderate" at all. I did mark a lot of "strongly" answers; I'd bet that my libertarian responses softened my conservative ones, and viola. Of course, that is (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) would that be classified as a 'fence sitter'?--right in the middle of all things?? Or a moderate? Dave K (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
(...) Vary eeenteresting. Now, here might be a big surprise: (URL) ME> (Ec=.38, Soc=0.21) JOHN (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | To No One's Big Surprise...
|
|
I'm a social libertarian... (URL) thought you'd like to know... Dave K (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) I guess you didn't bother to watch the video. Dick himself used the Q-word to describe the aftermath of a unilateral invasion of Iraq. But that was before he used it to mock people who said operation Blood For Oil was a Bad Idea. (...) Four (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Ah! I get it: Not that numbers mean anything. Cheers Richie Dulin (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Prettier than you, at least. (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) What a thing to say! (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) And yet it's not really an answer, is it? (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) I guess you answered your own question. ROSCO (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Do you have a cite for that? ROSCO (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) "This is precisely the mindset and rationale the terrorists would like their enemies to have. " Seems pretty unequivocal to me. (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Okay, I'll type slowly so you can follow along. (...) It shows that the enemy is afraid to engage the US military. The cowards decide to fight a war of propaganda targeting innocents instead. And really, do they think that the Iraqis will (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Not one death is "acceptable" (YOUR word, not mine). (...) Yes. What I mean is: if 10 innocents are killed today, and 12 tomorrow, then that doesn't mean we are suddenly "losing". And if there are only 2 the following day, we are not suddenly (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Averages are seldom a good measure of populations. Mind you, as the declining population approaches 1, they get a lot better. Cheers Richie Dulin (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) Hmmm, I have to admit I'm a little confused here. The death of innocents shows the US is winning, but actually keeping count of those deaths is what those terrorists want. Could you clarify something for me: is the death of innocents a good or (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) So you'd consider ANY body count "acceptable" in order to "win" this military action? And do you think the average Iraqi would have the same answer to that question as you do? ROSCO (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: We Should've Listened to Dick Cheney
|
|
(...) We are winning because we are taking control of areas that once weren't under control. Little by little the terrorists are being squeezed out. Winning or losing isn't based on the daily body count. This is precisely the mindset and rationale (...) (17 years ago, 17-Aug-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
