I can't imagine advocating large central government. I am against redistribution of wealth, especially Social Security. Applauding non-smoking laws does not equal advocating tighter control over business. I do think we should keep at least some of the existing controls but I don't think I advocated new ones. And when did I say anythng about socialized health care? I think I criticized Canada's system, actually. Well, let's see, I criticized HMO's at one point but... if I was in favor of socialized health care I'd be living in Canada.
Dana Heald, Tim writes: > I think I was actually calling someone else a commie, but I was replying > through the web interface, and forgot to quote what it was in response to. > I think that collectivist is a more proper term. Or possibly, my most hated > enemy, altruist. In various threads you have advocated large centralized > government, redistribution of wealth, tighter control over business, and > socialized health care. All of these things speak to me of collectivism, > socialism and yes communism. > > Now I understand that you wouldn't want to label yourself as such, what with > the negative connotations and all, but I think if you take a good hard look > you will see that you believe in many of the things that these philosophies > support. Also remember that when I use the words communist and socialist I > mean them as originally intended, not as the totalitarian hells that they > invariably turn into. Being a pure socialist or communist is not > necessarily an insult, it can be just a description. > > Of course I think that collectivism in all it's different shades is among > the most evil belief systems around. > > Timothy Heald > Information Systems Specialist > Overseas Security Advisory Council > U.S. Department of State > 571.345.2235 > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:31 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: woo hoo > > > oh. > > I thought that just became the point after I showed you what a public place > was, this mind you in response to your demand that I show you what possible > legal or other reason I could have for saying it was a public place. Or was > that your evil twin? I forget. I do know Tim called me a Communist for > saying it was. > > Anyway. I leave you with one final reference: > > http://www.esgs.org/uk/log37.htm > > And I will take the advice given there, which is to walk away. > > Have a nice day. > > Dana > > Nagy, Daniel J writes: > > > what were the oh, 15 or 25 emails before you started bringing up those, > and > > exempting the drunk in public one, i have to dispute the rest. never mind > > how amazing it is that it comes back to you showing us examples of the > law, > > which wasn't the point. the point was should the -government have the > right- > > to do these things, not what is currently in effect. > > > > --d. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2003 2:14 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: woo hoo > > > > > > The "female" told you what the definition of a public place is and backed > > it up with seven different references. If you *must* be irrationally > > insulting at least be accurate. > > > > Dana > > > > > i can respect anyone who can validly make a point. i understand that > isn't > > > what you mean when you say that, but hence why when ian was talking > about > > > his view, at least i could understand the logical reasoning, unlike the > > > female who just told us how she felt. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
