To: hchutch

Are you here for honest debate, or are you here to generate fodder for LP?
Until you bring some honest debate, I'm having private laughs at your expense. You keep floating this "you don't like Norquist and Rove" lead balloon. Let's deal with that, shall we? I don't like them, you do. There, now you've got me right where you want me: arguing the case on the facts and the merits thereof. Oh wait: that's not what you want at all.
|
483 posted on
12/14/2003 8:05:21 PM PST by
Sabertooth
(Credit where it's due: saveourlicense.com prevented SB60, and the Illegal Alien CDLs... for now.)
To: Sabertooth; Nick Danger; Bob J
If that floats your boat, go ahead.
You want to hang out with those folks, fine. But I do find it interesting that FR threads and posts from me pass for entertainment.
Nick Danger and Bob J have raised some questions about this, questions that go to motive and whether all this is really necessary. We have the assertion that Gaffney did think it was necessary, but he is not a disinterested party.
And the facts I see do not warrant such a fuss. There may be some room to debate the judgement calls made, but it still strikes me as a mixture of a strong belief that the secret evidence provisions are not on strong constiutional ground and a refusal to admit mistakes than anything malicious.
486 posted on
12/14/2003 8:22:22 PM PST by
hchutch
("I don't see what the big deal is, I really don't." - Major Vic Deakins, USAF (ret.))
To: Sabertooth
I don't like them, you do. There, now you've got me right where you want me: arguing the case on the facts and the merits thereof. The merits of a case sometimes extend beyond facts and figures. I don't remember a single instance of where anyone here has disputed your facts (how could we, we're not Norquist). It's what you've done with them that we are concerned about AND an issue you have failed to respond to until now.
Okay, we're finally getting to the other side of the story. You don't like Norquist and Rove. Maybe you don't like them so much due to adversarial positions on Muslims, portions of the Patriot Act and immigration, that you may exaggerate certain facts, connect dots that can't fairly be connected and submit unsupportable conclusions in an attempt to destroy his reputation and end his ability to continue to voice those opinions that are at odds with your own.
Case closed. Buh bye.
491 posted on
12/14/2003 8:34:47 PM PST by
Bob J
(www.freerepublic.net www.radiofreerepublic.com...check them out!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson