On Dec 5, 2004, at 3:12 PM, JDG wrote:
At 09:50 AM 12/3/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
What John did was a textbook straw man. Easy to knock down, but
just as easy to recognize for what it is.
Tell me Dave, what precisely was the straw man?The part about so
it
begins?Or maybe the payback
At 09:50 AM 12/3/2004 -0800 Dave Land wrote:
What John did was a textbook straw man. Easy to knock down, but
just as easy to recognize for what it is.
Tell me Dave, what precisely was the straw man?The part about so it
begins?Or maybe the payback part?
Oh wait. I didn't set any
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
For God's sake, Nick, what he's saying is pretty
obvious.
Indeed.
I was trying to express that he didn't seem to be getting what I was saying.
The United States didn't become the property of the Republican party on
Election Day. All that was won was the political
On Dec 3, 2004, at 8:57 AM, Nick Arnett wrote:
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
For God's sake, Nick, what he's saying is pretty
obvious.
Indeed.
I was trying to express that he didn't seem to be getting what I was
saying.
The United States didn't become the property of the Republican party
on Election
On Dec 2, 2004, at 6:43 PM, Nick Arnett wrote:
JDG wrote:
I must have missed the part where the 2004 election wasn't fair
or are
you buying into David Brin's Area-51 conspiracy theories as well?
I haven't offered an opinion about whether not the 2004 election was
fair. I wrote that in a
On Dec 2, 2004, at 7:37 PM, Warren Ockrassa wrote:
On Dec 2, 2004, at 8:16 PM, JDG wrote:
No... but I am also saying that the minority has no right to expect
that
their policies should remain in effect, and that the policies of
participants in the majority coalition should not be effected.
But
JDG wrote:
In a fair election, there are no losers. Sadly, it seems that hardly
anyone is willing to look at it that way these days.
In a fair election, there are no losers?
Consider the case of a referendum we had three on the ballot here in
Montgomery County, Maryland. One in particular
At 09:25 AM 12/2/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
In a fair election, there are no losers. Sadly, it seems that hardly
anyone is willing to look at it that way these days.
In a fair election, there are no losers?
Consider the case of a referendum we had three on the ballot here in
JDG wrote:
I must have missed the part where the 2004 election wasn't fair or are
you buying into David Brin's Area-51 conspiracy theories as well?
I haven't offered an opinion about whether not the 2004 election was
fair. I wrote that in a fair election, there are no losers. I was
hoping
JDG wrote:
At 09:25 AM 12/2/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
In a fair election, there are no losers. Sadly, it seems that
hardly anyone is willing to look at it that way these days.
In a fair election, there are no losers?
Consider the case of a referendum we had three on the ballot
At 06:43 PM 12/2/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
I must have missed the part where the 2004 election wasn't fair or are
you buying into David Brin's Area-51 conspiracy theories as well?
I haven't offered an opinion about whether not the 2004 election was
fair. I wrote that in a fair
--- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you saying that about half the nation's people
are now obligated to
act as though the other half won *ownership* of the
nation?
Do you view the election as an attack and conquest
or a conversation and
decision? I'm hearing To the victor go
At 06:32 AM 11/29/2004 -0800 Nick Arnett wrote:
JDG wrote:
Again, the only conclusion I can draw from using loaded language like so
it begins is that religious conservatives either shouldn't be allowed to
participate in the political process, or that if they are, they shouldn't
ever be
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Next time, maybe the democrats should be encouraging
democracy in the third world instead of whining about how bad Bush
is for America.
It worked for Bush. What they should really be complaining about
is how bad of a
republican Bush is!
Great post! I agree
- Original Message -
From: Horn, John [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 1:16 PM
Subject: RE: Won what? (was Re: So it begins)
Also, it sounds remarkably like what Dr. Brin has been preaching in
his postings on his website
-Original Message-
From: Horn, John [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 11:16 AM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: RE: Won what? (was Re: So it begins)
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Next time, maybe the democrats should be encouraging
democracy
JDG wrote:
Again, the only conclusion I can draw from using loaded language like so
it begins is that religious conservatives either shouldn't be allowed to
participate in the political process, or that if they are, they shouldn't
ever be allowed to actually *win* and maybe enact some portions of
- Original Message -
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 8:32 AM
Subject: Won what? (was Re: So it begins)
JDG wrote:
Again, the only conclusion I can draw from using loaded language like
so
it begins
On Nov 29, 2004, at 10:47 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
JDG wrote:
Again, the only conclusion I can draw from using loaded language like
so
it begins is that religious conservatives either shouldn't be
allowed
to
participate in the political process, or that if they
- Original Message -
From: Warren Ockrassa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: Won what? (was Re: So it begins)
On Nov 29, 2004, at 10:47 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
From: Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED
I don't think this is about winning or losing elections. To
me, it is about how the leadership views the nation. The
party that wins the White House and Congress hasn't won the
country in the way that the person with a winning lottery
ticket wins the money. Elections are our way of making
21 matches
Mail list logo
