Fallback Options

AstroPax wrote:
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:30:07 +0000 (UTC), klaus
wrote:

So you are claiming you met one, just one, anti-military, left wing
liberal, pro ACLU, pro NAMBLA, pro PETA, pro Cindy Sheehan voter. In
Park City?

Next time, I suppose I should put an "and/or" after each comma.

You know what I meant, and you know what pigo meant. But nice spin
attempt anyway.

So you never met a left wing liberal in PC? Then obviously, you can't
see the forest through the trees.

First, thank you for replying, otherwise Pigo would not see
it. cough

Second, the issue was not whether I met a left wing liberal, but the
extremist you described. Never met one and you know it. The only
extremists I have contact with are you and pigo. But the attempt to
put PETA and NAmBLA on par with Shehan is a cheap and overused
republican tactic. Putting all that into one sentence and accusation
as a criteria is a desperate attempt at putting the discussion onto
bull**** like NAMBLA, the alleged straw man. Have you never even
studied debate? Don't use the shotgun approach here if you expect not
to be called out. You're assertion is complete and utter bull**** and
it has nothing to do with the balance in Utah. You're deflecting and
diverting to a straw man. Would you like to address the criteria above
one at a a time? We'll start with:

1) Anti-military. Define.

Or if you just want to lose immedately, we can move right to:

2) NAMBLA supporting.

Game? Or you gonna duck and run again?

You're full of **** on this. Anti-military is getting so old it's not
even worthy of a responsqe. And NAMBLA has ZERO relevance here and is
simply an emotional desperate cry for help from your
errrrr... point. Yah.. point

-klaus

"pigo" wrote in message news:qb-

With exceptions in Utah and Idaho, America sure looks blue
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/23/13222/916

I am not sure, but I think much of the dissatisfaction with President Bush
is that he is acting more liberal than we thought he would. So the spin on
the #'s might be different than mainstream media is playing it.

Well, there is that Iraq thingy.
Y'know, 2000+ Americans getting killed for no good reason?

You don't think just a few people might be getting just a bit jaded due to
that?

Richard Henry wrote:

"pigo" wrote in message
...

But the aclu supports NAMBLA. Get the connection?

The ACLU supports NAMBLA? In what way?

You didn't know? One of their lawyers skied at Sundance.

-klaus

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:16:24 -0700, AstroPax
wrote:

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:30:07 +0000 (UTC), klaus
wrote:

So you are claiming you met one, just one, anti-military, left wing
liberal, pro ACLU, pro NAMBLA, pro PETA, pro Cindy Sheehan voter. In
Park City?

Next time, I suppose I should put an "and/or" after each comma.

You know what I meant, and you know what pigo meant. But nice spin
attempt anyway.


"Respond to what I meant, not what I said." As weasels go, that's a
classic.

bw

"tm" wrote in message
...
"Richard Henry" wrote:

The ACLU supports NAMBLA? In what way?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambla#Curley_v._NAMBLA

Which says, in part, "The American Civil Liberties Union makes it clear,
however, that it does not endorse NAMBLA's objectives."

Still thinking about heading to the desert?

http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/slc/projects...dForecast.php?

Now, I'm wondering if I need a fallback for getting into LCC on
Wednesday.

If it pleases Ullr
http://squall.sfsu.edu/gif/jetstream_pac_h72_00.gif

"Richard Henry" wrote in message
news:s0ahf.18973$xu.14172@fed1read01...

The ACLU supports NAMBLA? In what way?

They defend/support them in court cases.

"Richard Henry" wrote in message
news:fxbhf.18986$xu.2372@fed1read01...

"tm" wrote in message
...
"Richard Henry" wrote:

The ACLU supports NAMBLA? In what way?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambla#Curley_v._NAMBLA

Which says, in part, "The American Civil Liberties Union makes it
clear,
however, that it does not endorse NAMBLA's objectives."

No. They only make sure that they can continue to pursue them.
C'mon........

"AstroPax" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:30:07 +0000 (UTC), klaus
wrote:

So you are claiming you met one, just one, anti-military, left wing
liberal, pro ACLU, pro NAMBLA, pro PETA, pro Cindy Sheehan voter.
In
Park City?

Next time, I suppose I should put an "and/or" after each comma.

You know what I meant, and you know what pigo meant. But nice spin
attempt anyway.

So you never met a left wing liberal in PC? Then obviously, you
can't
see the forest through the trees.

That's why I don't bother with his posts. That has been the norm when
he tries to debate anything since I've been here. Along with changing
quotes.

"AstroPax" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 02:01:38 GMT, uglymoney
wrote:

Funny to me how
religous zealots always seem to morph and adapt their ethics to
whatever their current needs are.

Wow! Sounds exactly like something left-wing liberals do too!

-Astro

I saw a story yesterday about al frankin. Seems he has 112 employees,
including ONE black person. As a raving liberal don't you think he
should have at least as many as there are represented in NY
population. The US % is 13 but I would think that NY is 2-3 times
that.

He is also really ****ed off that someone had that information. He's
not denying the facts but is looking into suing over the reporter
having that information.

There was also some tidbits about Chappaquidic Ted's offshore assets
worth hundreds of millions on which he paid taxes in the $100K range.
The Kennedy's are also fighting the "wind farm" offshore from their
property.

And on it goes.