[nicmarlo]

There's been no "debate." You've posted only your OPINIONS, claiming your character assassinations against Schlafly should be given weight. They deserve NONE. If you're going to character assassinate Schlafly, who has proven herself more than knowledgeable about the goings-on with this Administration, the NAU, and the SPP, you better step up to the plate to show that YOU have any credibility. Upon WHAT do you rely to condemn her or her claims and statements? That is what I first asked you to provide: evidence to back up YOUR opinions and accusations.

You have YET to do so; and that is where the game ENDS with you: game, set, match.

[BillF]

Thanks for your kind and speedy reply after only about 8 minutes after my post when you didn't have time to post and deemed me unworthy of your valuable time. Thanks especially that you did so, in spite of posting previously that you didn't play "YOUR GAMES."

And thanks for yet another funny display of your proven flair for unintended irony and self-contradiction you declare "game, set, match." But, but, you don't play games.

I never condemned Schlafly or attacked her character. I said that she was prone to misstatements or exaggerations and I backed that up with specific quotes from her. I then compared her quotes with the SPP Flu Plan as you refuse to provide the actual, initial, and original SPP itself.

No matter how many times you reply, you can't do something that would be an easy way to confirm the Schlafly statements questioned by me, if it were possible.

You can NOT link or cite the actual text of the original 2005 SPP (even though you claim to have read it) and you can NOT cite one example of a legislative power delegated to a foreign official as claimed by Schlafly.

Your serve or did your "little time" of several posts back require you to leave the court? :)