Replies

You made several "educated guesses".

You also predicted that it would be a "narrow ruling", which is hardly what happened. You claimed "While some of the board members had a religious motive for mentioning ID in the 'statement', the final 'statement' does not constitute a breaching of a separation of church and state." and that "While some of the board members had a religious motive for mentioning ID in the 'statement', the final 'statement' does not constitute a breaching of a separation of church and state." (which appeared to be in the context of a prediction regarding the verdict).

Oh, wait, you DID say that "I think the judge will rule very narrowly in favor of the defendants".

Nevermind...

137 posted on 02/01/2006 3:53:38 PM PST by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)

I did pedict it would be a narrow ruling. It obviously wasn't. I did not predict who would win.

Oh, wait, you DID say that "I think the judge will rule very narrowly in favor of the defendants".

No, but what he meant was, he really had no idea which way the case would go.

You have to know how to read this stuff.

141 posted on 02/01/2006 3:56:28 PM PST by Right Wing Professor (When your mind's made up, nothing's more confusing than lots and lots and lots of facts.)