In article , Gunner says...

Another benefit is that it saves you from having to actually *read* what you
present as "evidence." g

Oh, I read everything I post.

Hello. Reality check time. The two statements above
are not the same thing.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 18 Apr 2005 05:31:54 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

You seem to be having a comprehension problem today.
My comments were about "Parade" magazine.

I cited an article that they ran. An article run in other periodicals
as well. Hence the other cites that included the same article. I
simply took the first instance that showed up.

If it's in parade, it's sure to be junk.

Jim


When the same article was published in the WSJ..its still junk because
the syndicators at Parade bought it?

Interesting. Puts new light on your mind set.

Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

On 18 Apr 2005 05:32:53 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Another benefit is that it saves you from having to actually *read* what you
present as "evidence." g

Oh, I read everything I post.

Hello. Reality check time. The two statements above
are not the same thing.

Jim


Reality check? From you?

The irony is exquisite.

Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

In article , Gunner says...

Another benefit is that it saves you from having to actually *read* what you
present as "evidence." g

Oh, I read everything I post.

Hello. Reality check time. The two statements above
are not the same thing.

Reality check? From you?

I think any fourth grader could figure out that "reading everything you
post" and reading all the source material you are posting from are
indeed two different things.

You've been caught out in the past, citing from links that oppose
your own position.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , Gunner says...

You seem to be having a comprehension problem today.
My comments were about "Parade" magazine.

I cited an article that they ran. An article run in other periodicals
as well. Hence the other cites that included the same article. I
simply took the first instance that showed up.

Yeah, we know. g

--
Ed Huntress

At least Gunner did not cite a New York TImes article by Jason Blair.


Dan

wrote in message
oups.com...
At least Gunner did not cite a New York TImes article by Jason Blair.

If it was the first thing that he caught in his Google net, you can be sure
he would have cited it without looking at the byline. g

--
Ed Huntress

On Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:54:27 -0400, Cliff wrote:

[
Political Groups Paid Two Relatives of House Leader

By PHILIP SHENON, The New York Times

WASHINGTON, April 5 - The wife and daughter of Tom DeLay, the House
majority leader, have been paid more than $500,000 since 2001 by Mr.
DeLay's political action and campaign committees, .......
]

Gunner's heros ........


http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/arti...0100 00000001

[ ....
The Republican chairman of the House ethics committee offered on
Wednesday to begin an investigation of Majority Leader Tom DeLay to
end a stalemate that has kept the panel from functioning this year.
....... writing the rules to protect DeLay ......
Republicans are ready to investigate ....
]
--
Cliff