Again, you are applying a selective double standard. My post was about on the same order as what is done here by conservatives all of the time- in fact I would say its a good deal less.

We have all pointed out here how Tom likes to draw the connection between leftists and collectivists, and collectivists and "mass murderers"- would you argue that that belongs on the flame board? Nelson and P and their obsessions with Saddam Lovers? Mark Eby and his Coward cracks? My god, the shitte Don had to take from Larry J and Dan Spires?

Toms inference WRT bowsers statment (that he [bowser] was simply looking for political gain for 'his side' and did not care about this happening again) was on the exact same level as what I charged tom with: Not caring about accountability and the prospect of it appening again.

So I ask you yet again why is it that Toms Rhetoric (and the rhetoric of the Conservative portion of the Zome) belongs here and mine belongs on flame?

"(Actually they can be rather amusing. Allow me,…..Hypocrite!)"

I assume you direct that at me? Now by your own standard, that belongs on flame. What was that about pot calling the kettle black?

You can extrapolate all sorts of insults and slander form the posts here, especially the ones on the right- and YES from my posts to. I believe that folks should give what they get and dish what they are served. Now, on the other hand, I think that you are being hypocritical by extrapolating only from my post and notfrom Toms post or from any one else that gets involved in these rather contentious discussions.

"Tom’s statement (as stated by Tom) was correct. Deny if wish, but It couldn’t be more obvious that the left AT THIS POINT is more interested in trying to oust Bush than it is in preventing another attack. It’s their focus."

And I have stated here that if Bush accepting responsibility for 911 means clinton accepting a goodly measure as well, then so be it. Do you see any damn partisan hacks on this board making equal claims in the way that means Bush have to take some responsibility?

NO!

You hear them, Like Tom, Sitting there shredding Clarke while at the same time exhibiting massive ignorance about what Clarke had to say. You see them, Like Tom, Shilling for the Bush administration. You see them, Like Tom, recycling the same daily drivel from Right Wing Talk- I know, I actually listen to what the other side says.

I have and I have in the past expressed significant respect for Tom B- I stand on that. What I said was an honest belief about the tone and nature of his posts. He's going down hill. I hear the same crud and miscontructions in his posts that I hear on O'Reilly the night before.

"Now, are you going to answer my original question or not? What’s your hurry?"

Yes, as soon as I find some time and you stop posting other crud I have to respond to first. There is a Post from Tom down there I'd really like to get to- but I get about 15min every 3 or 4 hours of work to pound something out.

And also:

"Davin’s standard denial tactic"

If its 'standard' find it in, say, 2 other posts of mine in a thread other than this- Let Robert S. arbitrate and judge if statements close match. You find it and I'll ship Robert a money order for $10 that he can send to you- if he is willing. C'mon- I dare you Rob...

Davin L.

Davin L.