Posted on 11/19/2001 2:03:57 PM PST by FF578
You're quite a sport yourself, Mr. Manners. And I didn't fire the first missile.
OWK: Self-appointed plagiarism SWAT Team member. Up against the wall plagiarizer!
Not too much skill involved in seeing that.
IMO you're off the page. How do you suppose to "save" 9/10 of our population to your way of thinking??? I suppose you want all Catholics and Jews to convert to your religion... and on down the line. Holy sanctimonious radicals..
There's a pickup truck in my neighborhood piloted by a soccer-mom type. It still has the stickers she put on it for the 2000 elections, as well as a big banner across the tailgate that says "When Women Vote, Democrats Win"
Case closed....
Mercy! I guess I am a bit selfish, maybe even an egomaniac, but I had no idea that I was responsible for the entire panoply of the Libertarian myth-structure or that my selfishness threatened to destroy everyone.
I didn't even know I was capable of all this.
And it's a good thing. If I had realized it, I would have been even more of an egomaniac than I am.
By the way, how can you tell that this selfishness of mine is unfounded in anything other than my own ego-mania?
And how can you tell that I am a selfish ego-maniac?
Are you...by any chance...Miss Cleo? (I won't tell anyone.)
Yeah.... just as they post long missives (like post 349) without attribution... while trying to pass the work off as their own.
No... it happens all the time...
No... really...
A dog... yeah, it was a dog...
A dog ate my homework...
Yeah... yeah, that's it....
Nobody saw me do it....
Really...
And you call me deceptive? Good grief.
If you're going to re-phrase, doesn't it make sense to re-phrase in such a way that the original speaker agrees? If the original speaker does not agree, then isn't it a misquote on it's face?
It's a re-phrase to you- and you are well aware that the original speaker would NOT agree with it... hence it is clearly you who is being deceptive, I merely pointed it out.
Oops, then it's JUSTIFIED plagiarism? His smell is sweeter.... perhaps. LOL
It is not Greg Koukl whose reputation has been damaged by your actions.
It is your own.
People here expect honesty and integrity.
As for comparing liberals to libertarian... Huh? I probably tend more to a Libertarian viewpoint than the strict party-line Republican; however, they're nuts on foreign policy and military matters, plus they never get elected. If they ever were to get elected, the entire Congress would gang up against them and none of their more valid policies would get carried out. Thus, I vote Republican, as they seem better equipped to defend my country, reduce dependence on government, and reduce regulations on every aspect of business.
It's attitudes such as yours that turn off a lot of women to the Republican vote. The "If you can't look at things 100% the way we do, you might as well leave the party." It's attitudes like that that get people like Clinton and Gore elected. Thank God Bush was able to overcome that factor.
Many times I've been asked for links or references ... for what helps make this site so credible, IMO, is that honesty is FORCED on us by fellow posters. It should not be offensive but taken as a positive request. It helps keep me on my toes whenever posting.
Not quite; see #367. Anecdotal evidence is not acceptable in any serious study. If it doesn't fit, I can't acquit.
You got that?? We libertarians also come in Christian varieties that Do Not Like
REPOs giving Offical government recognition that has now been given HOMOSEXUALITY
as an "OK deathstyle" as Long as they are Conservative/REPO Homosexuals.
(ask a TexAggie79 about that little bit of weirdness)
This was done as the first thing after inaugaration as a certain "so-called" Non-Liberal POL
apppointed openly PRACTICING homosexuals to be our ambassador to Romania
and to head the (Executive Branch) Office of National AIDS Policy
which is a liason to the Aids?Homosexual Commune(ity).
Are these things what we should now consider as conservative??
Count me out on that one.
How about you?
"Party" worth more than the soul??
I am one of those Christian libertarian varieties that wants NO Official Sanction for this BEHAVIOR. Chew on that a while.
You need to define what a liberal is TO YOU!
Then would you be so kind as to define what a libertarian is TO YOU.
Can you do that for everyone???
Don't strain yourself but I think you need to define YOUR terms.
LOL!
Have fun,
CATO
Not indicating a position on an issue does not entitle you to decide the poster's position. You took in upon yourself to label the poster a drug advocate not by the evidence, for there was none; but rather in an attempt to discredit the poster. Bad strategy. Easy to see, and quite damaging to the credibility.
If you notice folks staying away from you, it's in part due to the fact that you don't debate, you make stuff up. Nothing good comes from that, so we leave you alone.
Bye.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.