"I read the article. I am no "dear," and what is this "opine" crap? Are you O' freakin' Reilly?
The article states that the horse was running. Why was it running? Was it intentionally set free to run with its lead dangling? Does the article address this? NO! It does not!"
My, a little emotional, are we? And if you had read my initial post you will see that I set just such a disqualifyer. So you see, it may well be a horse of a different color :p
You did not set any "qualifier" for an accidental occurance, only for the horse untying a lead. Your "emotional" call for heads to roll coupled with your incredibly condescending tone has brought out my most sarcastic demeanor, but emotional I am not. In fact, your emotionalism reminds me of those on the left. And you further that impression with your insulting tone to anyone challenging your premise.
The exclamation points in my previous post were designed to throw the B.S. flag at your statement that I had not read the article. You have not sufficiently answered the questions, nor have you supported your cause in a logical manner. You are the weakest link, goodbye.