Text 173, 175 rader
Skriven 2004-07-29 19:21:18 av JOHNJWILSON (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av JOHN HULL
Ärende: Nothing much, I guess.
==============================
 
-> I don't suppose there is any possibility that the reason people say some
of the
-> things they do - and that you take exception to above - is because there
might
-> be some truth in it?  Nah, how could that be, eh, John?
->
Pick any LARGE group, scratch all of them and you will find
bigotry.
Making the statement 'scratch a liberal' is all-inclusive and CANNOT
contain 'some truth' :-|


 
  If that is the case, why then would you assume that he
-> is being any LESS intelligent when making that remark?
->
Because in my life I have done some unintelligent things :-)

 

-> combat with him) say he's unfit?  Why have they formed an organization
to
-> oppose his candidacy as president based on his Vietnam record?

Why, indeed?



  I will remind
-> you that this group covers the whole system of rank, from seaman to
admiral.

Line 'em up. Pro and con admirals, seamen, all.

  I
-> assume you know that ratings don't associate with officers normally, so
its
-> highly unprecedented for such a diverse group to come together on a
single
-> unifying issue almost to a man.  Surely, that must give you pause as to
Kerry's
-> qualifications for the most important part of being president...

It gives me pause. 

You don't follow Rove, much I take it.

find 'the enemy's strongest suit and attack THAT.
and
"Ride this war right through to the election"


  I know it does
-> me.

I know it does you. 

A 20 year old Lt. picking someone out of the water,
who beached his boat attacked and overcame...
...you know THAT story. Does it too, give you pause?


  In fact, just contemplating him as CinC scares the hell out of me. 

Bush's being so, scares me NOW :-)


-> Doesn't the fact that he sat in front of Congress and told those
politicians
-> that US servicemen were committing atrocities by the hundreds, as if
he'd seen
-> them (which he hadn't - he was repeating someone else's false
accusations as
-> his own) when clearly that was a blatant lie, give you pause?

You statement above REEKS of distortion-trying.
I think his disgust of war matches mine.
Perhaps you didn't notice, but really bad things happen.
Kerry was undoubtedly convinced that those vets told the truth
(much as you are convinced by the anti-Kerry vets)
he was mistaken and left the organization...

-> 
-> Do you begin to see why there is such vehement opposition to Kerry from
many of
-> those in this echo?...

No, I don't. I don't truly understand the course, crude, insulting
vehement opposition. The sweeping assertions the name-calling of those
opposed. (I believe you kicked Bob Klahn off All Politics unfairly...
and dropped that echo.
I'm dropping this echo because there seems to be little forward movement in 
the 'discussion' ... 
DEBATE is moderated by an astute, intelligent conservative.
He and I differ a LOT, interestingly and enjoyably.
It's pretty much issue-related but I confess there is universal
disgust at my attempts at poetry :-}

Cheers, from the elitist, pseudo-intellectual, snobbish,
old fart...

Oh. There was more:
=======================================================


  None of what I've said is stretching the truth, its all
-> fact, and we all know it...

One sentence. Two errors. You stretch in a lot of what you write...
and "we all know it" is, patently absurd.


  You purport yourself to be a fair and intelligent
-> man...

(Pause). Yes I do.


  Apply some of that in this case, if you can...

I tried, above. ('if you can'? :-) )


  Prove to the rest of us...

I'll stop before I read the rest of THIS sentence: I will
"Prove" nothing to you...

-> that you're not just another mealy mouthed liberal spouting boilerplate
from
-> the party apparatchiks.
->
Well, let's see. Aside from making my point(s) above I'll
examine what you spewed at me:

Mealy mouth. Coarsely-ground discourse?
Hmm.
Not enough reflection? Well, sure. I write and reply on the fly
hence my discourse is not as finely tuned as a position paper.

You think my conversation here is coarser, cruder than yours?

Now lets see. What else:

Liberal.

Why would I want to 'prove' otherwise? A label is
a convenience. I am a liberal and I am a conservative 
I contain multitudes.
Liberal have undergone too many definitions to either
accept or deny the label.
-> 
-> If you can, that is.
-> 
I don't care to try for your approval in this regard.
The fact that I consider your political opinions
predictable and thus boring is far more pertainant
than that they are presented crudely. 'Mealy mouthed'? :-) 
-> 
-> America:  First, Last, and Always!

...and crown thy good with brotherhood, from sea to shining sea...

Boiler-plate?

I wouldn't know where to find the boiler-plate.

factcheck.org

is interesting. Analysing boilerplate evidently from all sides...


--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)