"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
t...
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
t...
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
"John Mullen" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...
(Unnecessary background snipped)
When you have your own house in order (i.e., until you recognize
that
your
earlier accusation was false and are big enough to admit it), you
can
start
working on decorrupting the rest of us. My comment to Mary was
questioning
whether her concerns for disenfranchisement were only in relation
to
the
likely democcratic supporters--her answer indicated that indeed
was
the
case. Hell of a view of democracy IMO...
Brooks
snip further bellyaching
That's amazing! Some people can put a spin onto anything. I suppose
being a Tory must mean never having to be wrong. Must be
wonderful...
John
By George, you've hit the nail on the head! Being a George, I would
know,
wouldn't I? If you followed the thread, I'm sure you noticed how hard
he's
trying to change the subject to me and what I may have or have not
said
about
other things. All I'm trying to do is to hold his feet to the fire
and
force
him to be responsive to the dialogue he was having with Mary Shafer.
I
won't
be sucked into a debate by him on any other topic until such time as
it
suits
me, if it ever does. It seems to be giving him some heartburn,
because he
keeps
on trying (without success) to get me engaged so that he can walk away
from the
can of worms Mary Shafer uncovered without addressing any of them. It
won't
work, but he keeps trying. (^-^)))
You are admittedly very good at walking away from things that don't
agree
with your previous farsical pronouncements, on that I'll agree.
Brooks
And you still are trying to talk to me instead of Mary Shafer. You get
high
marks for persistently trying to wiggle out of the hot spot.
You have to expand your reading there, George--already been addressed in
this same thread. Mary's idea that it was A-OK to kick those absentee
ballots out because she thought they were "late" was full of holes--namely,
the democrats were contesting them on the basis of other technicalities, and
the same state courts that proved to be so sympathetic to Gore in other
respects ended up turning down their request to quash them. I guess you
don't like that, seeing as how you apparently find the idea of
disenfranchising those who tend to vote democrat repulsive, but doing so to
servicemembers and others who tend to lean towards the republican side is
apparently just peachy. I believe you voiced the concern that my bringing
this comparison up was somehow off-topic and inappropriate according to your
earlier comment?.....
You believe wrong. Show me where I voiced concern over any part of your
discussion with her about the election in Florida. I only took part in your
discussion after you started ducking being responsive and, even then, it was
only limited to pulling your chain about not responding.
......Well, it seems that the absentee ballot situation dealt
with the same topic Mary was introducing (disenfranchising voters in Florida
during 2000), and it is a hell of lot closer to being on-topic than the
original post since at least it entered the military side into the equation
in some fashion. Now George, have you gathered the gumption required to
admit that your earlier accusation that GWB never volunteered for overseas
service was incorrect, or are you still going to be all mealy-mouthed on
that one?
It doesn't require gumption to say anything on any subject on the usenet.
You're just trying to drag me into a discussion of positions I've taken in the
past based upon personal knowledge of how rated personnel can be grounded at
their own instance. I don't see that I can learn anything about that subject
from you, since I've forgotten more about it as a retired military pilot that
you ever knew. So call me mealy-mouthed if that's what rings your chimes.....it
makes no never-mind to me.
Have a nice Holiday Season.
George Z.
Brooks
George Z.
|