Re: Irregulars question: Milky Way

Ronn!Blankenship wrote: > At 12:45 AM 8/2/03 +1000, Ray Ludenia wrote: >> Doug Pensinger wrote: >> >>> Ronn!Blankenship wrote: >>> However, there's at least one spiral galaxy which apparently rotates "backwards": <> >>>

Re: [L3] Re: fight the evil of price discrimination

On Saturday, August 2, 2003, at 03:00 am, Deborah Harrell wrote: I have heard the name of Noam Chomsky - um, I thought he was a poet... Anyone who has studied either linguistics or computer science has definitely come across Chomsky. As for his political writings - geniuses are often strange

Re: NYT: "Weapons of Mass Confusion"

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > This speculation raises several questions in my mind: if Saddam destroyed his > nukes - WHY DIDN'T HE TELL US??? That's what we wanted, after all, what we > were demanding, the ostensible reason for the invasion. Why do what he was > supposed to but not gain any benefit

Re: The seven habits of highly ineffective list-subscribers

Julia Thompson wrote: > Ray Ludenia wrote: >> >> Jan Coffey wrote: >> >>> Wouldn't you have a chip on your shoulder after a while as well? You know, >>> having a chip on your shoulder doesn't mean there is anything wrong with >>> you. >> >> Actually, having a chip on both shoulders is better. I

Re: The seven habits of highly ineffective list-subscribers

At 11:21 PM 8/2/2003 +1000, you wrote: Julia Thompson wrote: > Ray Ludenia wrote: >> >> Jan Coffey wrote: >> >>> Wouldn't you have a chip on your shoulder after a while as well? You know, >>> having a chip on your shoulder doesn't mean there is anything wrong with >>> you. >> >> Actually, having

RE: My exciting day!

> From: Reggie Bautista [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Yikes! I'm glad everything went well. How did you first > discover the granuloma? At first, I had a symptom where it felt like there was something in my throat all the time. My doctor, unfortunately, misdiagnosed it and thought it was alle

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

At 09:25 PM 7/22/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Which of course is what this all about.So many Democrats turned a blind >> eye to Clinton's perjury > >But this is where you are precisely wrong John. No democrat defended > Clinton this. Not one said he was right Au contraire a grea

Re: Intent and language

- Original Message - From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 7:08 PM Subject: Re: Intent and language > On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 05:21:49PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote: > > > I have gone over your posts to make sure

Re: Intent and language

On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 12:17:24PM -0500, Dan Minette wrote: > You mean did I miss the fact that you were playing the "look at me, > I'm so clever, I'm mocking someone with their own words" game? What happened to I'll be happy to assume good intentions? > No, I just considered that of secondary

Re: Intent and language

Dan Minette wrote: > ORIFLAMME. ORIFLAMME? OK, I know that my mind is being dissolved by so many hormones and so many other things to think about (such as pending lactation), but I can't figure this one out even with some effort. Julia ___ h

Re: NYT: "Weapons of Mass Confusion"

>Come on Tom, think! If you know he has no WMD handy, isn't that the ideal >time to clobber him? It's a no-brainer. Well, I myself would be reluctant to accuse Dubya & Co. of not having brains... It's okay to clobber him - except that your rationale for doing so is that you have incontrovertibl

RE: "Weapons of Mass Confusion"

Tom Beck wrote: > This speculation raises several questions in my mind: if > Saddam destroyed his nukes - WHY DIDN'T HE TELL US??? That's > what we wanted, after all, what we were demanding, the > ostensible reason for the invasion. Why do what he was > supposed to but not gain any benefit fro

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

At 03:35 PM 8/1/2003 -0700 Matt Grimaldi wrote: >So then the President used information that ultimately >came from French Intelligence, a country which his own >administration has all but accused of having a conflict >of interest wrt Iraq? This sounds worse than before. I love this. You get to n

Re: Intent and language

- Original Message - From: "Julia Thompson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 12:57 PM Subject: Re: Intent and language > Dan Minette wrote: > > > ORIFLAMME. > > ORIFLAMME? > > OK, I know that my mind is being dissolv

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

> >Which of course is what > this all about.So many Democrats turned a blind > >> eye to Clinton's > perjury > > > >But this is where you are precisely wrong John. No democrat > defended > > Clinton this. Not one said he was right > > Au contraire a great many noted that "any man would lie

Re: Politics, was [L3] Re: fight the evil of price discrimination

Gautam Mukunda wrote: ... > > Katha Pollitt, among many other things, famously > forbade her daughter from flying an American flag > after September 11th because it was a symbol of, IIRC, > jingoism and hate. > > If that _doesn't_ bother you, then it explains why the > left has no traction in the

RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John D. Giorgis > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 12:46 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words > > At 09:25 PM 7/22/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >Which of course is what > this all about.

RE: Intent and language

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Julia Thompson > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 1:58 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Intent and language > > Dan Minette wrote: > > > ORIFLAMME. > > ORIFLAMME? > > OK, I know that my mind is being dissolved by so m

Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

At 04:34 PM 8/2/2003 -0400 Jon Gabriel wrote: >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >On >> Behalf Of John D. Giorgis >> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 12:46 PM >> To: Killer Bs Discussion >> Subject: Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words >> >> At 09:25 PM 7/22/2003 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

"John D. Giorgis" wrote: ... > > Bob Z. said that no Democrat defended Clinton on this. > > In my mind, Bob Z.'s claim is patently absurd. Many Democrats did argue > that any man would lie about adultery, and the only possible reason for > making such a claim was to attempt to mitigate the cha

RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of David Hobby > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 3:52 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words > > > >Which of course is what > > this all about.So many Democrats turned a blind > > >> eye to Clint

RE: Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of John D. Giorgis > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 4:41 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words > > At 04:34 PM 8/2/2003 -0400 Jon Gabriel wrote: > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTE

Re: Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

> What democrats said that it was acceptable for Clinton to lie under > oath? > I don't know what other Democrats may have said. I never said it was acceptable for him to lie under oath. I just didn't think it was an impeachable offense. I also think he should never have been forced to face t

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

--- Matt Grimaldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > So then the President used information that > ultimately > came from French Intelligence, a country which his > own > administration has all but accused of having a > conflict > of interest wrt Iraq? This sounds worse than > before. > > -- Matt No,

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

- Original Message - From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 5:12 PM Subject: Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words > --- Matt Grimaldi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > So then the President used information that

Re: Politics, was [L3] Re: fight the evil of price discrimination

--- David Hobby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Where have you been? Everybody uses symbols > differently, > of course. But I saw many flying the flag who > seemed to do so out > of some mix of patriotism, jingoism and hate. > (Anyway, they would > say things like "Kill all Arabs!") > W

Over the pond next week

I'm going to Scotland tomorrow to see my son, Ted, in Shogun MacBeth at the Churchhill theater in Edinburg. I'll be staying with friends who live north of Aberdeen. One of the side benefits of Teri being on leave with Continental. Dan M. ___ http://w

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > How likely is it that the French deliberately set > Bush ? > > Dan M. Ah, now _there_ you have the billion dollar question. I'm suspicious enough of the French to say it's possible, but I don't think it's likely. I frankly don't think that the French

Re: Politics, was [L3] Re: fight the evil of price discrimination

> >     So her rhetoric is over-the-top, but her basic > > position > > doesn't seem too far out. > > The prosecution rests. > Huh? What does that mean? How does what he said prove the case? It seems to me the opposite. She has been put forward as an example of an extremist whom liberals shoul

RE: The seven habits of highly ineffective societies

> From: William T Goodall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > I'm 1115 behind :) I don't know whether to admit defeat or not... > > It's not as bad as another list where I am 41359 behind... I think it's time to quit that particular list! Sheesh, and I thought 200 behind was bad... - jmh __

RE: The seven habits of highly ineffective societies

> From: Jan Coffey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Loo-tin-at Ker-nal. Ah, heck. I can't spell "Lt" either. One of those words that I've never been able to get down. Kinda like caffeine, vacuum and torture. (Spell check caught those!) - jmh ___ htt

Re: Harry Potter 5 (spoilers)

Spoiler warning! . . . . . . . . . Reggie Bautista wrote: > > David Hobby wrote: > > I kept hoping that Harry's anger would be > partially explained as psychic overflow > from Voldermort. I guess that it still could be, > but the evidence so far points to Harry being a > rathe

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 05:20:12PM -0400, Jon Gabriel wrote: > > Behalf Of David Hobby > > Given his past use of illegal drugs, I find it deeply > > hypocritical that Bush does not push for reduced penalties for their > > use. (While his position seems now to be that his past drug use > > was

Re: Politics, was [L3] Re: fight the evil of price discrimination

Gautam Mukunda wrote: ... > > When others have contaminated a symbol with things > > one > > does not believe in, one reasonable response is to > > avoid using > > the symbol. (Another is to attempt to "reclaim" it, > > but either > > should be fair.) > > So her rhetoric is over-the-to

RE: Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, August 02, 2003 6:04 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words > > > What democrats said that it was acceptable for Clinton to l

Re: Clinton's Perjury *Again* RE: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

David Hobby wrote: > > "John D. Giorgis" wrote: > > ... > > > > Bob Z. said that no Democrat defended Clinton on this. > > > > In my mind, Bob Z.'s claim is patently absurd. Many Democrats did argue > > that any man would lie about adultery, and the only possible reason for > > making such a cl

RE: The seven habits of highly ineffective societies

At 05:33 PM 8/2/03 -0500, Horn, John wrote: > From: Jan Coffey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Loo-tin-at Ker-nal. Ah, heck. I can't spell "Lt" either. Unlike the old joke about "engineer", I never learned how to spell it correctly despite being one. One of those words that I've never been abl

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

>On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 08:06:22PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote: > >>> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >> > On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 12:18:22 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote: >> > >> > >But that seems to be _your_ argument. If we understand why they >> > >are angry at us and seek to act in such a w

Re: Seth Finkelstein on 16 words

On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 10:28:49PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >On Tue, Jul 29, 2003 at 08:06:22PM -0700, Gautam Mukunda wrote: > > > >>> --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >> > On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 12:18:22 -0700 (PDT), Gautam Mukunda wrote: > >> > > >> > >But that seems to be _your_ a

Re: Politics, was [L3] Re: fight the evil of price discrimination

--- David Hobby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This argument has many flaws, but the most > important > one is that I do not have any clear idea of who > Katha Pollit > is, and might well have misspelled her name > repeatedly. : ) > I was responding to YOUR examples of her > "extremism".

Re: Politics, was [L3] Re: fight the evil of price discrimination

--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Huh? What does that mean? How does what he said > prove the case? It seems to > me the opposite. She has been put forward as an > example of an extremist whom > liberals should denounce. But the examples given > make her seem somewhat less > extreme to me than, say