Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
The first thing that happened on this thread when I dared to suggest that President Bush was not obligated to give him a job was - guess what - an insult directed at me by a Keyes supporter. (In other words, you might think about applying some consistency to your remarks.)

I don't understand. The first response to your sugestion was Gelato's, and the only thing that might be (mis)construed as an insult was his characterization of what you said (not of you) as an "extreme exaggeration".

I agree that the SECOND response got personal. I hate that stuff.

But then there's the "applying some consistency to your remarks" remark. Did rdf insult you? He's not responsible for what everyone, or even every Keyester, says to you. How could he be?

Further I saw nobody suggesting that Bush was obligated to give Keyes a job. Is there a Keyester here who thinks he is?

Mind you, it might be pretty prudent to do so, if Keyes would take it, which I doubt. One thing I would consider doing with something that I thought was a loose canon would be to tie it down.

But all this is beside the point. My own personal preference woud be for Keyesters and Shrubonistas (and in this thread it was a Keyester who started the digression) to stick to the topic. Vain dreamer that I am.

I think Gelato nailed it. There is indeed a set of "self-evident" principles which undergird our polity. They are broad enough to encompass a very great deal - excluding bald nihilism on the one hand and any worldview which denies or abrogates the dignity of each human being on the other.

These principles are sufficient to justify our response to terrorism, especially that of Osama Yo' Mama. Whatever our disgreements with Islam itself, we need not go into them to find ample justification for bringing terrorists and their supporters to bay.

Seems to me, anyway.

45 posted on 11/10/2001 4:31:25 PM PST by Mad Dawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: Mad Dawg
I don't understand. The first response to your sugestion was Gelato's, and the only thing that might be (mis)construed as an insult was his characterization of what you said (not of you) as an "extreme exaggeration".

I agree that the SECOND response got personal. I hate that stuff.

You're correct - it was not Gelato's post I was referring to. It was the second one.

48 posted on 11/10/2001 4:37:59 PM PST by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

To: Mad Dawg
and the only thing that might be (mis)construed as an insult was his characterization of what you said (not of you) as an "extreme exaggeration".

How insulting you are to your fellow Freepers.

68 posted on 11/10/2001 6:11:34 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson