Subject:
|
Re: Finally--a use of public funding that I can really get behind!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 20 Aug 2003 19:10:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
632 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> If you truly think that he's doing a decent job, then I agree that there is
> nothing I can say to you that would make a difference.
> > It is pretty funny, though, because it reminds me of some professors that I
> > had in college who were educated to the hilt with multiple Ph.D.s who could
> > not have possibly functioned outside academia.
>
> On what basis do you make this anecdotal assertion, and for what reason? I'd
> like a name-by-name accounting of the PhD's that you deem non-functional, and
> also *why* you deem them non-functional, so that I can review your accusation.
Good examples: the Networking professor who asked me what Novell was (in 1993,
when it was the only viable PC-based server NOS) and the Abstract Algebra
professor who made errors calculating student grades. You can subpoena my
lawyer for their names if you're interested. :)
> Very nice, but it has nothing to do with Bush-league diplomacy, which calls for
> pre-emptive action based on deceit and fabricated evidence.
I'm still waiting for substantive evidence that fabrication occurred. The
British government stands by their intelligence; one source for that piece of
intelligence was shown to be forged, but there were corroborating sources as
well. There's also a difference between lying and being wrong. I agree (for
once) with Clinton when he said that Bush probably shouldn't have said it, end
of story.
And as I've said before, war with Iraq was justified solely on the basis of
Iraqi violations of the terms of the cease-fire from the Gulf War.
> Because, after you're brain damaged and/or paralyzed from the neck down, and you
> require $500K+ in annual medical costs, you're likely to seek government
> assistance in some form to help with costs.
Y'know, used to be when some durn fool did a durn fool thing it was his own durn
fault. Now it's everybody's responsibility to take care of that durn fool. The
"for your own good" argument quickly becomes "for everybody's good."
> I tried three different ways to ask politely if you're insane, but they all came
> out as insults, so I deleted them. Instead, I'll simply ask:
> On what basis do you perceive Bush to be preferable to Gore?
There are those who would agree with you on my mental condition. No one's
proven anything yet!
One word: "lockbox." I did not want to hear that word day in day out for the
next four years. "Strategory" was preferable.
Seriously, I have no respect for Gore because he changed positions on many major
issues from the time when he was a Tennessee senator to when he became
Vice-Presidential nominee. He probably lost the presidency with his arrogance
during the first debate with Bush.
(And you can argue right back that Bush was always crooked, just like Dad, and
didn't need to flip-flop!)
Best regards,
Carl
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
34 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
