I didn't call you off your argument, Ken. I said "whoa." Perhaps there's
less between the lines than you thought there were. You can certainly
disagree...but "evil" is a loaded word...and I have yet to see someone
accuse Hillary of doing something beyond the scope of most politicians.
Thus most politicians, as a function of their job, are evil?
And you made a point of saying Kat's question was directed to "Bobby and me"
and "indirectly to the other guys" on the list. I'm sure the women on the
list are encouraged to respond, too...so that part of your response miffed
me a bit.
Let's all agree to disagree, OK? I certainly didn't mean my "whoa" to imply
that you shouldn't make your point, Ken. I'm equally sure your comments
about where the question was directed weren't meant to tell me whether I
could respond or not. So let's call it a draw and move on, neh?
Scott
----- Original Message -----
From: ken barber <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 1:32 PM
Subject: Re: Ironies
> wait, i do not mean anyones resonse was not welcomed.
> you can disagree with me as much as you like, all i
> meant was that i can't be called off of a answer i
> gave as to why i "hate" mrs clinton. that is all i
> meant to say. i took time to tell you i did agree with
> the point you made. and i do. it allowed me to make
> some observations of the war on terror and the war on
> drugs that i'd not have been able to make had you not
> disagreed. i was though ask to give a reason for my
> feelings about the clintons. i do have equal disdain
> for thethings this administration is doing that i
> think are not constitutional. an i appreciate your
> allowing me to agree with you on your point. even when
> a particular person is ask a question, everyone has
> been indirectly ask the same question. did i say that?
> i intended to. maybe i did not. anyway i appoligize if
> you though i was saying you could not express your
> views. i guess what i was saING WAS THE "WHOA", oops
> as being like "hey, you can't say that".
> hey, scott, i was thinking about saying something
> that would make all of you get out the flame thowers
> out to me. i wonder if i dare. mag and kat would
> skewer me but good. i'll comtemplate if i want to do
> that or not.
> hang in there friend, hit me with anything you want,
> i'll try to respond.
>
> but, guys, i must quit for a little time as my
> hands are giving me signals to stop for a little
> while. if i respond tomorrow, it will be quick enough.
>
> --- Scott Sands <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > I wasn't aware that my response was unwelcome.
> > However, my "whoa" was
> > directed towards your answering Kat's question by
> > telling us what Margaret
> > Thatcher DIDN'T do. What has Hillary Clinton done
> > that hasn't been done by
> > just about any man? THAT was my point. Think about
> > it or don't, but
> > implying offense that I even
> > responded...well...sheesh. Calm down?
> >
> > I don't hate Hillary Clinton, so I won't pretend
> > Kat's question was directed
> > toward me...but I won't pretend I'm not allowed to
> > respond--if it isn't
> > something she wanted a response on, couldn't she
> > e-mail you directly about
> > it? If it's on the post, it's meant for everyone.
> > Right?
> >
> > I weighed in, and I apologize if doing so was
> > inappropriate, but I really
> > don't think it was. I'm beginning to wonder, Ken,
> > if I'm welcome on the
> > list.
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: ken barber <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 1:10 PM
> > Subject: Re: Ironies
> >
> >
> > > besides you can't say whoa, when kat ask us the
> > why?
> > > and i directly answered her question that i think
> > was
> > > directed to bobby and to me and i guess indirectly
> > the
> > > rest of the list. she did say "you boys."
> > >
> > > lets be honest, mr clinton lied about an
> > affair,
> > > but, he did it "under oath". and that is perjury
> > and
> > > there are men and women in jail for perjury. it is
> > a
> > > felony.
> > > but again i agree with your point. as i have
> > > already said. the government is taking too much
> > > liberty with this war on terror, just as they have
> > > taken too much liberty with the war on drugs. due
> > > process is out the window if they catch you with
> > lots
> > > of cash. they can take it and do it without
> > proving
> > > that you did nothing wrong and even if you are
> > > innocent and never convicted, they can keep the
> > money
> > > and/or property. jose padea (spelling may be
> > wrong)
> > > took into custody for supporting terrorist.
> > american
> > > citizen. they have not charged him, they have not
> > let
> > > him get legal councel. this is very wrong. people
> > have
> > > been killed by law enforcement that i think
> > charged
> > > that they were into the drug business, when in
> > fact
> > > the county just wanted the person's property. i am
> > not
> > > a fan of government run amuc.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- Scott Sands <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > > > Whoa.
> > > >
> > > > First of all, let's be fair about what Bill
> > Clinton
> > > > did--he lied about an
> > > > affair. How many men have done jail time for
> > that?
> > > > Second, let's be fair
> > > > about what Hillary Clinton has done--she has run
> > > > campaigns the way
> > > > politicians have been running them in this
> > country
> > > > for years and years.
> > > >
> > > > What George W. Bush has done to the office of
> > > > President and to the
> > > > Constitution of this country (particularly to
> > the
> > > > doctrine of habeus corpus)
> > > > is far more troubling to me.
> > > >
> > > > Scott
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: ken barber <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 12:34 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: Ironies
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > margret thacher was a powerful woman. she did
> > not
> > > > > switch her opinions with every poll or every
> > focus
> > > > > group that met. i might add that she did not
> > get
> > > > her
> > > > > power from a man she married. she did not run
> > > > > campaigns with hand picked news personnel that
> > > > would
> > > > > only ask questions that she wanted ask. mrs
> > > > clinton
> > > > > has never been in a public forum that she has
> > not
> > > > > control who would be there.
> > > > > powerful? not my definition of powerful.
> > hate,
> > > > no
> > > > > lets usethe right word, despise is the word
> > and
> > > > > whatthese two did to the office of the
> > president
> > > > and
> > > > > to the constitution of this country is the
> > reason
> > > > that
> > > > > i dispise both of them.
> > > > > questioned answered.
> > > > >
> > > > > --- "K. Salkin" <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > Now com'on guys. Why do you hate her so
> > much?
> > > > > > She's a powerful woman but I
> > > > > > fail to see where she's so evil. If you're
> > > > thinking
> > > > > > Whitewater remember
> > > > > > that her involvement was never proved in
> > that
> > > > case.
> > > > > > I've seen far more
> > > > > > evidence of misuse in power by men and no
> > one
> > > > bats
> > > > > > an eye.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm beginning to think that men fear
> > powerful
> > > > women.
> > > > > > ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kat
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "ken barber" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > > > Newsgroups: bit.listserv.c-palsy
> > > > > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > > > Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 3:07 PM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Ironies
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > well, mag, i have been watching politics
> > since
> > > > i
> > > > > > was
> > > > > > > in middle school. back then i did not
> > identify
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > > either party. i can say that nobody in my
> > time
> > > > has
> > > > > > > struck me as being even a close 2nd to
> > hillary
> > > > > > > clinton.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- Magenta Raine <[log in to unmask]>
> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > In a message dated 6/7/03 8:24:16 PM
> > Pacific
> > > > > > > > Daylight Time,
> > > > > > > > [log in to unmask] writes:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Which 'baby Bush' are you referring
> > to,
> > > > Mag?
> > > > > > > > There are two out there!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > the one in 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. ;-<
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM).
> http://calendar.yahoo.com
>
|
