XPost: alt.society.liberalism, talk.politics.guns   
   From: matttelles@sprynet.com   
      
   "max headroom"  wrote in   
   news:kgjino$7k6$2@dont-email.me:   
      
   > Matt  wrote in   
   > news:XnsA173A27E05D58matttellessprynetcom@78.46.70.116:   
   >   
   >> "max headroom"  wrote in   
   >> news:kgjb4k$uf4$2@dont-email.me:   
   >   
   >>> Matt  wrote in   
   >>> news:kgj5bq$p8k$1@dont-email.me:   
   >   
   >>>> "max headroom"  wrote in   
   >>>> news:kgimnl$tdi$2@dont-email.me:   
   >   
   >>>>> Matt  wrote in   
   >>>>> news:XnsA1733390CA81Bmatttellessprynetcom@78.46.70.116:   
   >   
   >>>>>> "max headroom"  wrote in   
   >>>>>> news:kghc08$gof$2@dont-email.me:   
   >   
   >>>>>>> Matt  wrote in   
   >>>>>>> news:XnsA172C83D7945Fmatttellessprynetcom@78.46.70.116:   
   >   
   >>>>>>>> "max headroom"  wrote in   
   >>>>>>>> news:kgh6le$s4f$3@dont-email.me:   
   >   
   >>>>>>>>> Democrats are equally guilty of the sins for which you condemn   
   >>>>>>>>> conservatives.   
   >   
   >>>>>>>> So, because some Democrats are guilty of some of the sins which   
   >>>>>>>> make Republicans bad for America, they are equals? Then,   
   >>>>>>>> surely, it makes no difference who you vote for, and you should   
   >>>>>>>> vote a straight Democratic ticket.   
   >   
   >>>>>>> Do you vote a straight ticket? Since that requires almost no   
   >>>>>>> thought, it would explain much.   
   >   
   >>>>>> Ah, so now you think you know how I vote too.   
   >   
   >>>>> Do you see that squiggly mark after the word "ticket"? That's   
   >>>>> called a "question mark" and it means the sentence asks a   
   >>>>> question. It is not making a statement.   
   >   
   >>>> Really. Do you know the word "rhetorical"? Perhaps you should look   
   >>>> it up. Asking a question and making a statement after it implies a   
   >>>> level of rhetoric.   
   >   
   >>> Any inference of rhetoric was purely on your part.   
   >   
   >> Then why did you offer the opinion that it explained a lot?...   
   >   
   > I didn't. If you read more carefully, you'll see I wrote that it WOULD   
   > explain much. It's a conditional statement.   
   >   
   >> ... Shouldn't you wait until I answer? No, because you've already   
   >> made up your mind.   
   >   
   > BTW, it was a question you never answered. Why is that?   
   >   
   >>>>> No need to thank me: elucidating the mysterious to the enfeebled   
   >>>>> is my burden   
   >   
   >>>> Thank you. You have shown yourself for what you are. A Conservative   
   >>>> loser....   
   >   
   >>> So you believe educators are losers. That's rather harsh... for a   
   >>> pinkie.   
   >   
   >> You educate about as well as, say, George W. Bush decides.   
   >   
   > It's unseemly for an educator to blame the student, but in your case,   
   > I imagine it happened frequently.   
      
   To blame you? No, I don't blame you for your failings, that would be   
   silly. I blame you for not learning from them.   
      
   >   
   >>>> ... Oops, my bad, I was redundant.   
   >   
   >>> Wow... if you believe all educators are conservatives, that kinda   
   >>> places you to the left of Bernie Sanders on the political spectrum.   
   >   
   >> Really. Bernie being an independent, you have the most interesting   
   >> view....   
   >   
   > Sanders an independent?!? "Sanders is a self-described democratic   
   > socialist..."   
   >   
   > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_sanders   
      
   Oooo. And? Care to look up democratic socialist? Do be sure to get the   
   capitalization correct, it makes a rather large difference.   
      
      
   >   
   >> ... That would make your idol a bit to the right....   
   >   
   > Please quote from my writing evidence that I have an idol. Use as many   
   > lines as necessary.   
      
   Of course. Yet, you judge me quite easily without any such.   
      
   A hypocrite and a Conservative. Again, I'm being redundant.   
      
   Matt   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)