Tommie, Is this really called for, Screaming my name ? Oh yes I forgot everything is my fault, yah thats it, something is not right, blame Werner.
Come-on, lighten up. I've asked you in the past not to misrepresent or selectively 'interpret' what i write. Now I am demanding it. And don't start in with interrogatories about this , you know what I'm referring to. Werner --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "justifiedright" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Et tu, Asbury Couple? Et tu? > > Why do people keep laying things on me today that aren't mine? > > I said nothing, good or bad about JK and his position on the > Mission, and I did not say he himself is an issue. > > WERNER posted saying that it is misinformation to assert JK has a > position on the mission. > > I did nothing more than refer to WERNER to the Holy Spirit tape, > where Jim did have a position. > > That's it. Period. All I said. > > From that I'm being associated with calling him pariah and making > him an issue. > > Was not Werner making him an issue for daring to speak his name? > > Like I said. Some folks are a bit too sensitive when it comes to > him. > > I'm certain I did not attack him or make him an issue by simply > pointing WERNER to a tape. > > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "asburycouple" <asburycouple@> > wrote: > > > > Tom, in this case I think he has every right to support it without > > becoming the issue. Are you saying that just because he's on the > > council he doesn't get to have an opinion on this - or that it > can't > > be different from your own? > > > > I am totally against the mission. I strongly disagree with Jim on > > this one. But being on the council does not eliminate his right > to > > have an opinion, just as the others are not supportive of the > mission > > and have their own right to express their opinion. I don't agree > > with Jim but respect him for not being afraid to take a visible > stand > > for what he believes in the face of so much opposition. This > isn't > > going to earn him votes, and he knows it. Yet he is willing to > stand > > on conviction. Whether you agree or not, give some credit for > > standing on principles. I know someone else on this board who > often > > takes an unpopular stand (ie., you). I also disagree with you > much > > of the time but do appreciate the same quality in you. > > > > > > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "justifiedright" > > <justifiedright@> wrote: > > > > > > You're right. I see that you were responding to Paul. > > > > > > While we are on that subject then, I don't think JK's view on > the > > > matter is irrelevant. > > > > > > I'm irrelevant. He's a sitting council person. There's a > > > difference from when I talk and when he talks. > > > > > > His carries different weight. > > > > > > We've been down this road before. He isn't just an advocate > > > anymore. He is a community leader. His words even when not on > the > > > dais have an effect. > > > > > > If he is going to ne "neutral" on the Mission he can't then > > continue > > > to speak up for it and defend it. > > > > > > > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "dfsavgny" <dfsavgny@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "justifiedright" > > > > <justifiedright@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nothing in my post here calls for JK to be a pariah. In > fact, > > > not > > > > > one word of it makes a value judgment at all about him or > his > > > > > positions. > > > > > > > > Tom, look at my post. I never said you did anything. In fact, > > > while I > > > > responded to your post I clearly said it was Paul's post, on > > > behalf > > > > of SUFA, that I considered to be the germinating factor. Your > > > post, > > > > which you have accurately explained, does not make him a > pariah. > > > But, > > > > is another in a series, started by Paul, followed by Allan, > and > > of > > > > course by mine (which in essence probably exacerbated what I > was > > > > complaining about), then Werner's and yours. All of which > > > > cumulatively took us off the issues. It is not JK that brought > > the > > > > Mission here, nor is it any of his support of/reluctance to > > > oppose, > > > > or attendance at any zoning board or other meetings that will > > > affect > > > > the Mission's existence here. All of that is quite frankly > > > > irrelevant, and Paul, on behalf of SUFA, should realize that. > > > > > > > > SUFA should not demonize ANYONE. SUFA is not about ANYONE. It > is > > > > about the appropriateness of the Mission in AP. That's it. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/kOt0.A/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/Y2tolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
