Terrorism Re: Corporate transparency

S. Alexander Jacobson alex@shop.com
Wed, 9 Jan 2002 23:19:33 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)


You seem to be loosing the flow of the argument.
The discussion here started with the
applicability of the word terrorist to the
American Revolutionaries.  I asked for evidence,
you dropped the issue.

It continued to a discussion of the
appropriateness of rallying behind the flag in a
time of war.  You started name calling.

The conversation then extended to whether Bush was
using the cover of war to "ram through a
conservative agenda".  I noted the presence of
rhetoric and the lack of content and asked for
examples.  You continued name calling.

It is clear that you have always thought Bush is
an idiot and I think you feel very good about
your consistency in doing so.  (What is a
dittohead?) My question at this time is whether
you are actually going to defend any position or
just engage in more rhetoric and name calling?

-Alex-

P.S. Re people being "smacked down." Maher
is still on the air.  And the question I was
asking was exactly what he was to have stopped?
In particular what conservative agenda has been
rammed through?

P.P.S. My point about Clinton was that Presidents
are always concerned about the effect of
casualties on their popularity.  I think Bush is
less concerned than Clinton.  If you want me to
compare Bush to his father, I could do that as
well.

On Wed, 9 Jan 2002, Jeff Bone wrote:

>
> "S. Alexander Jacobson" wrote:
>
> > It sounds much more like your "lot of people" are
> > unhappy with Bush's new found popularity.
>
> What a dittohead comment.  The people that are (rightly) saying Bush is an
> idiot *now* are the same ones that were saying he was an idiot 9 months
> ago.  The hypocrites are those who went from "idiot" to "strong crisis
> leader" in a wave of irrational nationalism.  And the dittoheads just spin,
> spin, spin it anyway that's favorable to them.  My position:  he was an
> idiot before, and he's still an idiot.
>
> > Do you have a pointer?  Perhaps you are talking
> > about Clinton's triple failure to act against Bin
> > Laden or about Clinton's decision not to send
> > ground troops into the Balkans.
>
> Dittohead alert!  You can always identify a dittohead when they start
> talking about Clinton.  Newsflash:  he's not the fucking president
> anymore!  I know that's painful, as now you don't have a Satan Incarnate to
> pin the world's trouble on, but get over it!
>
> > > The people who were saying that while it was happening -
> > > when there was potential to stop it - got smacked down.
> >
> > Examples?  Specifics?
>
> Well, DUH!  For starters:  who were we talking about, brainiac?
>
> jb
>
>

___________________________________________________________________
S. Alexander Jacobson                   i2x Media
1-212-787-1914 voice                    1-603-288-1280 fax