Kevin - you said:
"It's great day when I can piss off more than one person!" If that's really your attitude, and it appears to be, then I think a lot of the confrontation you have been complaining about on the list has nothing to do with socio-political orientation (conservative, moderate, or liberal). It seems you go looking for trouble, and find it. Pity. -Ben > No. Michael, I never stated Ben had a viewpoint or an agenda. I merely > stated he didn't react the same way to everyone and offered an > explanation for what I thought was the reason why. > > And I hate people that nit pick, (which you said you don't do in one > sentence and then go on and do to me, so maybe you should look up > hypocritical in the dictionary as well), other peoples grammar or > understanding of the English language and then can't even run a friggin' > spell check on their own messages. Maybe you should look up how to > spell conservative. > > It's great day when I can piss off more than one person! Especially, > opps I almost called someone a name, like you. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Haggerty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 3:53 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Librals Suck ~ lol > > Kevin, I am not interested in explaining everything to you or in > nitpicking > every comment anyone on this list has ever made. > > You said Ben is selective in who he will criticize for 'etiquitte' based > on > their political beliefs. That statement implies Ben has an agenda in his > comments to this list. For that matter, you called it concervative. > > In this case, I used 'agenda' as a synonym for 'viewpoint', which was > the > original language you used. The word is more precise and (I am making an > assumption here) in keeping with the meaning of your original comment. > > Many people have agendas which are easy to discern. An obvious one you > may > be familiar with is the agenda Douglas Adams' puts forth in his Dilbert > comic strip. He is anti-stupid people. > > That being said, please spend more time reading that dictionary you are > so > fond of before attacking me over my ability to understand the written > word. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Schmidt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 3:54 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Librals Suck ~ lol > > > I never said he had an agenda, but rather merely pointed out that he > hadn't reacted the same when the shoe was on the other foot. > > I personally am not against the death penalty, but I would be more > persuaded to see someone suffer life in prison, if I saw them truly > suffering, rather than watching cable TV and playing sports, working out > etc. I think prisoners have way too many luxuries these days. > > > Of course we won't bother to get into the hypocrisy of supporting > abortion and being against the death penalty and vice-versa. > > > I once saw a bumper stickers on a car that said: > > "Meat is Murder" and "Pro-Choice" > > <cf_gross_point> > I wanted to ask the driver if I ate aborted fetuses if it would be > wrong? > </cf_gross_point> > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Haggerty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 2:27 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Librals Suck ~ lol > > In Ben's defense, capital punishment is the ultimate conservative > viewpoint. > I have trouble seeing an agenda in his comments. > > Let's all play nice... some of us are active in anti-death penalty > causes > and prefer not to be referred to as pansies. > > One could argue the real pansies are people whose insecurities rule them > to > the point the need to see others die to have a sense of justice in this > world. > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Schmidt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 1:21 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Librals Suck ~ lol > > > Ben, > > I think we both know, that the name calling has gone both ways on this > list. I myself have been guilty of it, however I have yet to see you > ostracize someone when the person guilty of the name calling was > pointing it in the direction of someone with a more conservative view > point. > > Kevin > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 12:17 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Librals Suck ~ lol > > Nate- > > Where do you get off calling names ("pansy liberals")? > > We have a strong tradition on this list of agreeing to > disagree, but respecting each others' opinions. > > Some of the people on this lists are liberals, some are > moderates, some are conservatives. > > We have some lively discussions, but not name-calling. > > Also, your venting might benefit from use of a spell > checker. > > -Ben > > > Regardless, charges would need to be brought forward for such a case > to be > > brought to court. If consensual, who is filling the charges ? > > > > Your parents against your gf or bf ? I guess you should have payed > more > > attention to their rules. Also - likely this would be dropped, and if > not - > > sentanced with a probation or community service, as minors wouldn't be > > charged as adults for such an act. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Beth F" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 11:22 AM > > Subject: Re: Librals Suck ~ lol > > > > > > > ----- > > > > > > > > Hmmm, how old where you and your girlfriend when ....? Both over > 18? > > > > Even if it was consensual, I presume it was :), was it legal? > > > > > > > > > > Most states in the US have a consensual age of 16. This means that > an > > adult > > > can't have sex with anyone under this age legally. It does NOT mean > that > > two > > > 14 year olds doing it is illegal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
