OK,
Send your kid to public school.
If he survives the random shootings and the drugs, then you can send him to
the District of Columbia to be an aid.
There he can be influenced by powereful men (and women) to do some really
neat things.
He can live in a city where violent crime is high and civilians can't buy a
handgun to protect themselves.
While he is learing how to avoid being raped or mugged, he can dodge the
terrorist plane crashings.
Responsibility starts at home, with the parents. Would you really want to
send your child out to play on the "Hill"?
Most aids come from affluent households with educated parents.
I would guess that there's not a one of them that would have morgatged thier
house and loand Foley the money for a year, but they freely hand over their
children...
Foley screwed up and I think the latest remarks about alcoholism and being
molested as a child are copouts.
Yes, it is time to clean house. Five year term limits for a couple of
generations will do more to cure these problems than any arguments about
Republicans or Democrats.
James Taylor
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk
Discussion" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Re: OT: Gore Still Ahead
On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:03:28AM -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
Are you looking for ways to excuse the child molesting Foley did just
because he continued carrying on after the boys were legally men?
Let's be *perfectly clear* here, shall we?
"Talking dirty" to them does not constitute "child molestation" under
any construction of anyone's law that I'm aware of.
And 16 isn't exactly a child, either.
What kind of depraved child molester protector are you? Other than
"Republican" - that much is so obvious that it's redundant. Now tell us
that I shouldn't go so hard on Foley, because it's not his fault that
god made him gay.
You can go as hard on Foley as you like. I hope he takes the whole,
sordid, hypocritical Republican establishment down with him. just lets
be hard on him for the right reasons: he owed a duty to his
constituency not to get embroiled in a scandal, and he owed a duty to
those pages *specifically*, because he was or had been in a position of
direct power and control over them. He failed in those duties.
Would this have been less likely to have happened had he been out about
his preference? (For men, I mean, not for boys.) Yeah, probably.
Is it society's fault that he felt he needed to be even partially in
the closet? Yes?
Am *I* gay? No.
Do I want people to confuse me for Donald Rumsfeld? Not even on your
birthday. :-)
You can tell the repubs apart from the dems because, by and large, the
dems utilise the tools of rational argument, and are calm and cool, and
the repubs appeal to emotion, fear, and (dare we say this) terror.
Not all of either side, certainly, but a statistically significant
majority.
Alas, demagoguery works better with the electorate than pedagogy.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Designer Baylink RFC
2100
Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think '87
e24
St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1 727 647
1274
"That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later,
they stop having sex with you." -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
asterisk-biz mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
