Kevin- This is not sarcasm.
I made it clear earlier that I was commenting on attitude, not on politics. You seem to be ignoring that. Continuing this conversation is pointless. -Ben > Ben, > > Ahh...email it's hard to detect the sarcasm isn't it. > > I don't really mean that. But there comes a point in a debate where no > matter what I say someone will disagree with me. So I guess that was my > way of saying I give up. And my confrontation does have to do with you > political leanings and how you approached those of us who support them > and those of us who don't. > > > Kevin > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2002 4:04 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: Librals Suck ~ lol > > 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
