Debate : Search Results: bruce half irish


Off-Topic / Debate / Search Results: bruce half irish

Results 781 – 800 of about 1900.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
(...) And I completely concur with Bruce. I know that RBPS is not a church going/God believing person, but that does not negate my appreciation of his retelling of the Bible in LEGO one little bit! I look forward to the latest additions to his (...) (22 years ago, 26-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.413)

		Re: Idealism vs Realism?
(...) I'm more partial to Lakeesha than Shirly. (looking at ground and aimlessly kicking rocks)....ummmmm...no, I meant it in a bad way... :-O Bruce (22 years ago, 29-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.413)

		Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
(...) That's because you don't want to admit that there is anything wrong about your debating techniques, which is the real thing I'm objecting to. The subject is just the medium. This is now the third time I've pointed this out (all three contained (...) (22 years ago, 29-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.413)

		Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
(...) Okay, so it's redundant. I just like the tongue-twister aspects, as Larry noted. :-) Bruce (22 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Idealism vs Realism?
(...) Thomas Sowell appears regularly in the Orange County Register, a paper that doesn't even make a pretense at balance (like Sowell) and is wall-to-wall right wing. The only good thing about Sowell is that he enjoys labeling anyone he disagrees (...) (22 years ago, 28-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: I point out that Scott meets everything with a new attack, and he proves me right yet again
(...) Hey, Ill submit to judgment by my peers. Maybe we should run a "Who is the most self-righteous" poll? ;-) Bruce (22 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
(...) I specifically said I don't agree with Bush's unilateral outlook. I'm critical of your axe-grinding, slanted presentations, and sanctimonious self-righteousness, but not always with your actual positions. Bruce (22 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Justice for all.....
(...) Thank you. That's half of the answer I was looking for. Does anyone have a link where the same impartial humanitarian organization declares the Al-Jazeera footage humiliating? I found some hints with a quick google search, but nothing quite as (...) (21 years ago, 18-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

half
(score: 0.412)

		Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
(...) What part of this is becoming a Monty Python routine didn't you understand? The automatic gainsaying of whatever the other person said isn't an argument. You offer no support for your statements, while you leave support for mine right there (I (...) (22 years ago, 27-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		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". (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		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 (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		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 (...) (22 years ago, 26-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) That's too cryptic for me. Guess I'll have to misunderstand you, too. Bruce (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: world mandate (Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace))
(...) And that means said foreign policy must be analyzed in a vacuum? Nonsense. You are doing so because it suits your purpose and you explanation is just an excuse. (...) What? Not even "facts" this time? (...) You didn't answer it before, and you (...) (22 years ago, 25-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) You weren't paying attention to earlier messages. The law as written. If you want to move onto later claims, that's another story. (...) Is this addressed to me or the board in general? If me, you are barking up the wrong tree. Bruce (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) No - it would seem close and I understand you thinking that, but not really. I merely wish to establish one thing before moving on to the next. If Joe Blow walking down the street suddenly spotted the 2nd Amendment, what would be his (...) (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) It says "the security of a free state", not "the maintaining of a free state from internal tyrants" or even "securing a free state". It's a long reach to place your interpretation on the law as written. Bruce (22 years ago, 24-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
(...) I can take that any number of ways. (...) The USA actively supports Israel, yes. So do others. You seem to be grinding an anti-US axe. Axe-grinders opinions are generally speaking, not to be trusted. They present only so much of the story as (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
(...) Of course the perception is fact. "Perception" as in there is the perception that Israel is the victim. You misconstrued my answer. (...) Who cares? I was merely pointing out that you were being inconsistent. Or you weren't making your real (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.412)

		Bush Down Plays Need for Plan (on Deficit)
From Reuters: ((URL) ) - quote - When asked about the U.S. dollar's fall in value and market concerns about the deficit, Bush said: "We certainly need to send a signal to the capital markets that we're going to maintain spending discipline." - end (...) (21 years ago, 15-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

half
(score: 0.412)

More: Next Page >>