 | | Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) You are misrepresenting me. (...) I think you are wrong to feel safer. (...) Have I ever said they should be left in place? (...) No. Did I say that? (...) I'm not avoiding anything, you are jumping to conclusions and putting words in my (...) (23 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) I find that comment a little full of "self-righteousness". :) Scott A (23 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) ...but you (& Chris) do share Bush's unilateral outlook to some degree, that is what I don't agree with. Scott A (23 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(...) But you're accepting Bush's victory, even though it, too, was well within the margin of error. Are you familiar with the notion of "special pleading?" (...) As "first stones" go, I find this phrase particularly offensive. For quite a while you (...) (23 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(...) was (...) I don't see how it matters. I suspect he would have done largely the same stuff in Afghanistan, but not be threatening Iraq. But really, who can know? It doesn't need to be that Gore would be doing anything different for us to think (...) (23 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(...) Oh for crying out loud. The "popular majority" that Gore supposedly won by was a smaller percentage than Bush won in florida, and well within the margin of error. Seriously, does anyone think Gore would be doing much different than Bush right (...) (23 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes: <snip> (...) I'll forward it off to one of my WW newsgroups! By the way, wasn't that 2 hours last night great?? Toby, Josh and Donna lost, trying to get back to DC... Whoever said that WW uses (...) (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(...) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) There--in case we ferget in the future, we can fall back on one of these... Dave K. (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(...) It's a trick of equivocation, I admit. I was making a joke at the expense of "our" "duly" "elected" "President!" (...) A big one, IMO! I'd love to see someone try to exploit it, but that would be as good as forfeiting the race, since it would (...) (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(...) Me too. Chris (did I forget the smiley?) (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) the (...) All of them. War is hell. Chris (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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". (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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! (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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, (...) (23 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? (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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... (23 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! (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 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 (...) (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(...) Ship 'em to Canada--we have folks who throw pies 'n stuff into the faces of our politicians, 'specially the PM :) Signs--baah! I'd have put a banner across the street! ;) Reading thru these two articles, looks like the police chief is falling (...) (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Freedom of Speech? W sez NO!
|
|
(URL) a followup here and elsewhere: (URL) suppose that the sign-carriers can take comfort in the fact that at least they weren't shipped to Cuba... Dave! (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) ...for how much of his track record did he have the support of the West? Did we act when he started gassing his own people? Was Bush Sr not willing to let his invasion of Q8 go with only mild rumblings until Thatcher convinced him (...) (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
|
|
(...) Shall I compare Bush to Hitler? The fact that some of what Bush Jr suggests the USA should do is against international law should be enough. (...) Ill tell you what, you show me which facts you think I am omitting. (...) You mean I did not (...) (23 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
|
|
(...) Who has the biggest gun, perhaps? Cheers Richie (23 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: This should be required reading for this group...
|
|
(...) "Logic" classes. It badly plagiarizes the popular but flawed "justified true belief" definition for knowledge, Venn diagrams which bastardize the law of excluded middle, and that stupid verse about the bear dancing. It shows a distaste for the (...) (23 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: For Those That *Don't Get* the 2nd Amendement (was Re: Those stupid liberal)
|
|
(...) I'm not sure what the greater crime is; the fact that they happily relinquished a civil liberty, or the fact that they are not likely going to get it back. (23 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: Medical Marijuana
|
|
(...) One would hope that these outlandish drug laws might be coming to an end... (23 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
 | | Re: 2nd Amendment -- Bare Bones
|
|
(...) Well, perhaps there is no resolution -- we certainly have more than one instance of bad law, bad stare decisis, coming down from the high court...and it does annoy. The court has, in particular, been guilty of making bad law that is in the way (...) (23 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|