Debate : 19664


Off-Topic / Debate / 19664

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) You and I agree that we should not be contributing aid to the worst nations in the world. It is a disgrace that China is a PNTR partner. Supporting Israel with no strings attached (and maybe at all) is also bad. Being there to help them up (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) You contradict yourself. How would letting Israel fall *decrease* their misery? (...) Very good question. The answer is because of the UN. We didn't have a mandate to enter Iraq; only to free Kuwait. We *should* have continued on to Baghdad (...) (22 years ago, 21-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Making Israel play by "the rules" would, I think, be the first step in reaching a peace in the region. Most of the Arab world objects to the way that Israel is treated to a double standard. I know you just don't think that's a reasonable (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) What you are failing to place into the Israeli question is Palestinian terrorism. Most if not all of Israeli aggression is in retaliation for terrorism. What is going to bring peace in that region is for the Palestinians to eschew terror and (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) And most if not all of the Palestinian aggression is in retaliation for Israeli terrorism. I'm not even saying that you're wrong. I think you're right. But that doesn't change the rightness of what I said. They are in a cycle of violence (...) (22 years ago, 22-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) <snip> (...) Palestinian "aggression"? You can't even bring yourself to call it "terrorism". I don't really want to go here, though, because I fear it is an issue of differing perspectives. (...) Agreed. (...) Well, I bet you can guess how (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Frank Filz

(...) Hmm, in a "totally open and free US society" (which we've never had, or certainly haven't had this century), I don't think nuking one city would collapse us. See, the thing is, with a totally open and free society, the power is sufficiently (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) Come on, Frank, you can't possibly make the comparison of the incineration of 2 *buildings* to the incineration of an entire *city*. And I wasn't talking about just *any* city; I specifically meant Washington, D.C. And what if the attack came (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

John: You really will just argue inanely over almost anything won't you? Frank's post was so reasonable, so even-handed as to almost be void of interesting comment. At face value, and as history has taught us again and again -- taking out a single (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) Speaking of trolls... (...) Please cite for me examples in history where the taking out of a capital by a nuclear weapon has been manifestly unimportant in the grand scheme of things. (...) So, let me get this straight-- you assert that the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) No that would not end our society as we know it. It would go a long way toward restoring the government though. At the very least we should try to go back to the pre-FDR days. Ask your grandparents about how the elected representatives used (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) In the interest of furthering my understanding, are you talking about the same time period in which civil rights were non-existent, Presidents could serve an unlimited number of terms, the securities industry was wholly (and tragically) (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) While I agree with the trend of your note as a whole -- times have never been perfect and nostalgia is often silly, This one point seems weird. I would rather that people have the ability to trick me losing my money than to take it from me at (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) I presume you're talking about the government in the latter case, but can you rephrase that without the "at gunpoint" phrase? There's no initiation of force involved; it's simple enforcement of social contract. You may disagree with the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) False. Contracts are things agreed to by both parties. I was never given a choice to reject taxes and the attendant benefits. I am no more _morally_ bound by this "social contract" than were the Africans enslaved in the south through their (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) That is absolutely true. (...) By remaining in the country (and partaking of the benefits of government programs) you have willingingly entered the contract (or your parents entered you into the contract, which you must take up with them). (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —David Koudys

(...) I think there's a big difference b/w the two--in your case, the services you receive via 'your tax dollar' aid you as well as your fellow man. Sure you were 'born into' the agreement, or 'moved into' the agreement when you become a citizen of (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) What do these goods have to do with taxes? Except for the second order effect of a legal framework to protect contracts, that is. There's no reason any of these have to be government provided. You picked the wrong goods to praise government (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Right, and the "taxes" paid by the slaves -- in the form of 100% of their productivity -- aided them as well as their fellows. They were fed, clothed, and housed without ever having to worry about those things. And in some cases, the system (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) You've got to stop using the slaves as an example, because you're hurting your argument. The slaves were forcibly removed from their homeland and forcibly kept at work here as property. They had no opportunity to renounce citizenship and leave (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

What are the criteria used to determine if an analogy is adequate? No analogy will be perfect because it isn't the exact situation that is being discussed. It is a tool used to point out certain particular similarities that are important to the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Oh, come on. An analogy is inadequate if the salient characteristic likened between the two subjects is fundamentally distinct, as in the case of a slave who cannot leave the US and a citizen who can freely expatriate (and renounce that same (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) This ia always an interesting quandry. The contract has always been viewed as new-generation-enforcable, but is that correct? Are you bound by your parent's contract (or as far back as necessary to either the original constitution or your (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) And I pay my taxes and vote my concience. I just think it's messed up to call it a contract. It's a dodge. I'd be happier if we just enunciated the fact that we are partially or sort-of owned by the state. As long as they control our right to (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Rather than simply asserting that it is not a contract, you must demonstrate why it is not a contract. You can't just say "it's a dodge" and pretend to have refuted it. (...) The slaves who were freed (and thereafter remained in the US) (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) As I said, morally you may be correct, but practically, I see no better way to proceed. It's not an ideal contract, because you are bound by your predessor's contract, not one you made for yourself. I must admit I categorically reject the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) The problem is there's no free market in governmental systems at the moment, and the present players collude to keep it that way. (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) That doesn't really address the topic at hand (and perhaps that was your intent). -->Bruce<-- (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Sure it does. You can't argue that we have the right of choice if there's no free market (of ideas, or of systems) to choose from, except unless you argue that we have to lump the choices, constrained as they are by the International (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) You seem to be confusing between choosing from what's available, with having a right to choose from what's available, with somehow expecting that you should be offered whatever happens to suit your fancy. So, yes, I can argue it. (...) I'm not (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Sorry if I haven't been clear. I don't have any expectation that the market will provide me whatever I fancy, in this market or any other. What my expectation is, though, is that for it to be a free market, there cannot be unreasonable (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) I'm still not getting where you are going with this, Larry. Free market of governments? What in the world does that have to do with inheritable contracts as a system of stable (or coercive) government? Unreasonable coercive barriers to entry (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) This subthread got a start when someone said "if you don't like it (that you inherited a contract), vote with your feet". Perfectly valid statement. What I was trying to point out was that it is not a perfect solution. Life isn't perfect, of (...) (22 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —David Koudys

(...) News Flash--nothing is perfect. Not to bring religion into it, but we live in a fallen world. Beyond the religions scope, Democracy is the 'lesser of all evils". Heck, you and I don't even live in a pure democratic society, and basically used (...) (22 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —David Koudys

(...) I would surmise that "Fre Market" and "Governmental Systems" are exclusive. There has to be oversight to "Free Market" in order to maintain the safety and health of those involved in the Free Market system--hence Gov't. I live in a reasonably (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Sorry, David, you were reading too fast. You missed the point. I speak of a marketplace*of* ideas themselves, a marketplace IN government systems. But be that as it may, past reading in this group will show that I don't agree that government (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) If it is being tampered with, then it isn't free. Or is that what you meant? (...) Building codes also prevent a wide array of construction techniques that are cheaper and safer because the building industry is entrenched in the code setting (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) The market is plenty free--we have 200+ nations to choose from! The fact that no nation has arisen to suit the desires of every last person is irrelevant. That's the market in action. Dave! (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) There are sufficiently high barriers to entry (the 200+ nations collude together to prevent new entrants) that your assertion that "the market is free" is false, Dave! (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) How so? Do you mean we're not free to form a new nation, or that we're not free to move from one to the next? In some cases, the latter is certainly true, but that's just the market in action; different types of product are available, with (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

Preface: Plowed ground alert. I probably shouldn't have posted a flurry of responses, just summarised and let it go. This has been discussed before at length. That said, onward. (...) Not in and of itself. But if you had a grand scheme for a $1000 (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) I think you simply couldn't resist an opportunity to invoke Dave! (...) I may be misunderstanding the question, but let me try with a hypothetical stab at it. Suppose you and a group of like-minded individuals locate and claim a previously (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) I think Larry is referring to the constraints of the monopoly of the 2 party system in America. As I have in the past, I see nothing wrong with joining one of the 2 parties and working for change *within* that context instead of trying to (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —David Koudys

(...) Because others do things in a way that doesn't adhere to the "Too high" standard that the almighty United States sets for the rest of the world... I'll stick with Canada, where new political party(s) can spring up overnight, and long standing (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Does such an island exist? As far as I can tell, all land on this planet is either claimed by some particular government (and thus ought not to be hived off without the acquiescence of that government, or of the landowners or at least of (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Alas, that's just the way it goes; do you think that in a government-less world that wouldn't be the case? I want the free market to cough up a free place for me to live, but the free market doesn't do that any more than the current situation (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) I'll let the market (of ideas) decide. Oh wait, it did! You lost, Dave! (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Really? Then why can I only choose from a field of one cable company in my area? Dave! (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Because you have a coercive monopoly. A government granted that company a monopoly... But you know this already, Dave! What are you up to? (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —David Koudys

(...) Yes, seriously--why is that? One cable company--I hate that. I don't want to go to satellite 'cause then I lose my internet connex, and I dislike High Speed dial-up, etc. But every few months, my cable bill goes up a couple of dollars, even (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Larry Pieniazek

(...) How does one exit? What if the contract was abrogated by one side (the side with the big guns)? (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Well, explain how it was abrogated (in legally specific terms) and then file suit. Otherwise, leave the country and renounce your US citizenship. Dave! (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Scott Arthur

(...) Then they will discover the power of democracy. ;) Remember Bush’s "Read my lips" promise? Scott A (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

Ok, I was refering to the operation of the Government, not the social changes that occured between now and then despite the government's best efforts to the contrary. See maybe we have a slight difference of opinion here. I see the Government, not (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) You may freely assert that point, but you must also document it, and you should also document how things would have been better without government intervention. The examples I gave: (...) are not social changes (with the exception of the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) the (...) Which resolved regardless of the the attempts to stop it. (...) So? That is why we have an election. (...) So? Who's fault is it if they lose everything gambling on the securities industry. (...) Also resolved despite efforts to the (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Excuse me? In many cases it was forcibly resolved by the Federal Government. (...) As was demonstrated in 2000, the will of a majority of the people is not necessarily reflected in the election process. (...) You misunderstand--brokers (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Frank Filz

(...) Who is comprised of people just like you and me. There is nothing magical about the Federal Government compared to any other group of concerned people. I would also point out that the government didn't do very much to stop the abuse until (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) Allow me to repeat this yet again. The percentage of votes that Gore supposedly won the nation wide popular vote by was less than the percentage of votes bush won in Florida by. Both numbers are well within the margin of error. However the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

Mike: A lot of us believe the election was rigged in Florida by thousands of votes months before the election took place. (URL) am no friend to Gore or to his psycho wife Tipper -- I just want to know that we had an honest election, and we did not. (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) for their actions but probably won't. (...) For the record, I voted for Bush Jr. simply because I felt he was the least unquaified at the time. Gore just plain scared me, whereas Bush simply came off as stupid. -Mike Petrucelli (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Ah, who knows? I think it bears far greater investigation but our press is asleep at the wheel. I can't even watch CNN anymore, and is Fox is a bloody joke. There's still some hard-hitting stuff on the web, but you have to dig a little -- (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Frank Filz

(...) I wonder how well that would really work, or do you mean I should have my own generator for the winter months when solar is unlikely to provide the power I need. I think electric plants are far more efficient than a generator could be (and of (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Good modern photovoltaics pay for themselves in ~13 years and last ~20 years. Because they're modular, you can scale your installation easily to provide far in excess of the power you need. Or am I misunderstanding your meaning? (...) You just (...) (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Pelton wheels, photovoltaics, hydro, biomas and marine current [not the "war"] —Scott Arthur

(...) Not in Scotland; here photovoltaics & wind power are predictably unpredictable. We are taking a centralised broad-spectrum approach to renewables: hydro, biomas, wind and marine current power. Right now about 10% of our power needs come from (...) (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Right, but that's just a recount of the accepted votes, and it doesn't factor in the irregularities in ballot format, the use of obsolete machines in democrat-friendly districts, the unlawful removal of legal voters from the voting registries, (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) In each case I advocated shooting someone they either would have or did cause physical harm or were violating basic freedoms. Disagreeing with someone (...) Politicians only went to washington when there was actually something that needed (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Care to finish that thought? But even without the finish I can take issue with your point. You're advocating the preemptive murder of people whom you perceive to violate your basic freedoms, am I right? Doesn't that sound a trifle insane to (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

(...) I can vouch for the disparagement of solar power in CA where there is bill either under consideration or that has been passed that allows PG&E to "tax" an individual's non-use of the utility when that individual is using alternative energy (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Wow, that *is* pretty lame. By that logic, they could charge dead people for their non-use of food, air, and water. Dave! (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Estate taxes? =) -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) Zing! Good one! JOHN (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) fire? (...) is not grounds for shooting them. (How did that happen?) (...) a (...) there (...) You misunderstand due to me not being more clear in that post. She was attacked by 7 different people. After the first 4 she bought a gun which was (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) Before someone points out my error, I should have describe the woman's actions as "second degree murder" rather than "third degree murder." I'm reluctant to address the specifics of your story in case further details should be revealed as we (...) (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Scott Arthur

(...) Indeed, whole countries have been invaded [allegedly] on that basis. :-\ Scott A (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —David Koudys

(...) Ouch! Down goes Fraser! He'll be reeling after that hit! Dave K (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Scott Arthur

(...) I have to say, I could not agree more with this point. Searching for legal loopholes to justify highly questionable in/actions is a major annoyance to me. The UK's use of cluster bombs in Iraq [anti-personnel bombs in all but name] is an (...) (22 years ago, 26-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) attacked (...) registered (...) be (...) Oh trust me, if I could find a link I would post it. It was in the local paper about 2 or 3 years ago. I can not claim to remember everything and if you want to analyze it I don't blame you one bit. I (...) (22 years ago, 27-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Dave Schuler

(...) The most damning part of this tale isn't given; was the woman sentenced or acquitted? (...) I appreciate your candor and your understanding of my skepticism. I still have trouble believing that the case could have been gagged or swept under (...) (22 years ago, 27-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Mike Petrucelli

(...) or (...) she (...) neccessary (...) I don't remember for sure but I don't think she was acquitted. (...) It has happened before. You won't find this in any paper... I know a women who's 70something year old neigbor was sentenced to 25 years in (...) (22 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Stand your ground (ie., go ahead and shoot) —Dave Schuler

(...) What had been a primarily theoretical debate for Mike and me has turned into policy in the great state of Florida: (URL) the kicker--now you can shoot someone in the street just because you *feel* threatened! So when that apparently middle (...) (20 years ago, 6-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) As Rodney might say, "tough crowd"-- it's almost as if people think the idea isn't all half bad:-) (...) I see your point, but even if we were able to go back, it would certainly have a profound effect upon society *as we know it*. But how (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Frank Filz

(...) Hmm, doesn't each of the original 13 states have a copy of the constitution? Of course nuking D.C. wouldn't get the oldest constitution in effect (you'd have to nuke Boston to do that). Also, the nuke isn't going to incinerate the whole city, (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) That's just silly. I have no problem calling it terrorism. Any tactic designed primarily to inspire fear (or "shock and awe?") is a terrorist tactic. I still stand behind the notion that terrorism sometimes makes good sense. My verbiage was (...) (22 years ago, 23-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) Fair enough. (...) Yeah, because I *do* make a distinction between the deadly force perpetrated by both sides. The Israelis desire to root out and kill *terrorists*-- the fact that these cowardly scumbags hide in and among the civilian (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) Are you saying that Gore isn't a Christian? Quick internet check: Southern Baptist. Oh hey, his favorite movie is Local Hero and TV show is Futurama. Well, alright! Oh, sorry for the digression. So, if what you say is true, then the Left hates (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) Not necessarily. If he believes like a good boy in global warming, abortion, gun control, entitlements, etc,etc, and keeps his (misguided) religion to himself he's okay. I wonder if Bush's favorite TV show is King of the Hill? :-) (...) No, (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Bruce Schlickbernd

(...) This is all a dodge: you stated that the left hates Bush because he is a Christian, and yet they supported a Christian for president. The evidence doesn't support your theory. (...) So was I. (...) Actually, they get what they want even if (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) Yes. I can't think of a plausible reason to think that we are more concerned with doing good than _everyone_ else. I think that all people are motivated by their own interests which means that any country or society will have "good" and "bad" (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) Pretty cynical. And un-American, I might add. (...) As in investing, "past performance doesn't guarantee future results";-) (...) Rigged??? Come on. How did those who "rigged" the election know it would be so close in popular vote? The idea is (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) It's unamerican to think that people are self interested? Or to think that nations are made up of good and bad people? Or to think that America is largely like many other countries? (...) Well, they couldn't know _how_ close it would be until (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) Bingo. That is exactly what I meant. I believe that the US is unique and special; a shining example of Freedom to the world. I am proud to be an American, and I believe all Americans should be proud of their country and grateful for living in (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

(...) Wow, more crazy delusions! There are no chosen people or countries, John -- stop scaring the neighbors! We choose ourselves. Some of us have the benefit of NOT having to obey the voices in YOUR head. He's a John Neal -- The Covenant, the (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —John Neal

(...) You have a license to practice that pop psychology? (...) As far as you know. (...) You probably think you are a hoot. JOHN (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Thomas Stangl

(...) I think he's much less dangerous than people like you, John. Because Richard, while often extremely annoying, is more interested in everyone's freedom from oppression. You, however, are one of the most oppressive people in this forum, and if (...) (22 years ago, 31-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) So, obviously you think it is untrue, but why? It seems like virtually all the evidence points the way I'm suggesting. And for the record, I don't think that he's as dumb as he seems...he almost couldn't be! But even if he were, it is still (...) (22 years ago, 25-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Selçuk Göre

(...) from enother message: (...) I always believed that the 'merican sterotype (arrogant, ignorant, self centric), that every foreigner (to US) is familiar enough, is just a comically exaggerated unreality. At least I know too many american friends (...) (22 years ago, 2-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

Weeks said: (...) Then Neal said: (...) Isn't the basis of your faith a struggle between the good and bad out to achieve their own goals? I my world view self-interest is a given. It is the moving force behind every human action since the beginning. (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Just Teasing, I Have No Intention of Debating Any of This... —Richard Marchetti

This one's for resident heavy-hitter and heavy-lifter Larry P, y'all know how he loves a cite from authority: "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only (...) (22 years ago, 24-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)