--- Reggie Bautista <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personal attacks make for good arguements since
> when?  Maybe you've been
> working such long hours that you've forgotten that
> one of the principles of
> this list is to attack the argument, not the person
> who made it.  Tell us
> why Ted Kennedy's arguements are wrong without
> resorting to bringing up an
> incident that happened... how many decades ago?...
> and accusing him of being
> drunk.  Maybe he was.  But that's not a particularly
> persuasive
> counter-arguement.
> 
> Reggie Bautista

I'll stop bringing up that particular incident when
Mary Jo Kopechne comes and asks me to.

He _killed_ somebody, then used his family influence
to cover it up.  People complain about the _Bushes_? 
The Kennedys treat that state like their personal
fiefdom.  He _killed_ someone.  The most sympathetic
possible interpretation to him is that he let her
drown and then walked away without a care in the
world.  God knows what really happened.

So I'll say it's not relevant to what sort of a person
he is when Mary Jo asks me to, and not before.  That
seems fair.  It's more of a chance than he gave her.

=====
Gautam Mukunda
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Freedom is not free"
http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it!
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to