Subject:
|
Re: Wench as a word
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:15:40 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
492 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes:
> Ed,
>
> Boy, Ed, you sure an interesting person.
Some find me very interesting, thank you.
>
> Ed \"Boxer\" Jones wrote:
>
> > Well there's a fine figure to admire. James Trafficant, the man that took
> > money from a "Supposed" mob-figure and then the mob figure disappeared, a • man
> > who has repeatedly failed to file his Federal Income taxes (which will make • him
> > a Libertarian hero), the man with one of the foulest mouth's in Washington, • and
> > a man who doesn't seem to own a shirt that has been ironed or doesn't have a
> > stain. Yeah, that's my idea of what this country needs.
>
> Boy, Ed, the ability to iron a sure sure qualifies someone to have a
> House seat, huh? I would love to see what your thoughts on
> qualifications are.
How do you iron a sure? :')
Qualifications: One would definitely be that you have to pay your taxes.
James happens to be one of the few Democrats that
> did not accept the Clinton Administrations lines on numerous issues.
Of course rather than debate his character, or lack thereof, you chose to focus
only on my shirt comment. So, from your comments above, you don't care what
kind of slimy weasel is in Washington as long as he disagrees with Clinton?
> I could go on and on regarding David Bonior's questionable practices,
> but why bother? I am sure he can iron his shirt, so he's qualified,
> right?
I could care less about Bonior or his shirts.
> >
> > And before you ask how I know all this, remember I am originally from Ohio -
> > Trafficant's district. The man is an embarrassment.
>
> As are some people here who have problems with shirts.
As are some people's inability to debate all the facts presented but to only
single out those items that will win them easy points.
> > What I can't believe is
> > that the people still vote him. He has failed on every one of his campaign
> > promises - bring work to Youngstown, better funding for schools, etc.
>
> Well, politicians from both sides to that, Ed. I think we all can agree
> on that.
Certainly, but after 20(?) years, you'd think someone would say to heck with
him and try someone else.
>
> > Oh of course, one word negates everything that follows, how logical, how • inane.
>
> Well, Ed, I got burned by it, if you don't like it, tough. I had
> numerous people tell me that, from all sides of the spectrum. Inane,
> indeed.
So rather than argue the points made, you chose to perpetuate the "debate
policy" instituted by "who-knows-who"? I would have thought better of your
debating abilities than to cop out so easily and quickly.
> You seem to have some partisanship issues, here, Ed, I think that you
> should join your president to shed the partisan bickering and work
> together to restore America.
>
> Scott S.
Partisanship issues, not at all. My voting record would reflect that I vote on
issues, not party. If I had partisanship issues, I would have applauded your
pleasure with Trafficant. But my stomach would have turned in the process.
Trafficant is certainly not my idea of someone who should even be involved in
restoring America.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Wench as a word
|
| Ed, (...) Well, Ed, since i don't know the particulars on this one, why don't you inform us of it? I do remember something along the lines of congress people now being under the same laws oas we, the citizens, are. If he did not pay his taxes, he (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Wench as a word
|
| Ed, Boy, Ed, you sure an interesting person. (...) Boy, Ed, the ability to iron a sure sure qualifies someone to have a House seat, huh? I would love to see what your thoughts on qualifications are. James happens to be one of the few Democrats that (...) (24 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
74 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
