"LOL, my limitations no doubt being related to my unwillingness to see things as you do."
Precisely what I would say about my assay of your perspective, Frank. Took the words right out of my mouth.
So an obvious conundrum! Sort of like the classic 'is your blue the same as my blue argument'. How to solve this? Hmmmmm- maybe we could go back and see who levels this charge repeatedly and consistently every time there is a disagreement between the two of us (or really, just about anyone left of center)? Don't you think that might be telling?
Naw, lets not, too much work for such an obvious result. I really don't give a rats ass. Tell yah what, since (quite ironically, to a sublime extent) the 'high ground' in disagreement is so very, very, important, why don't you just scrabble on up that hill and do a victory little dance. Spike a conceptual football, whatever. I'll be down here applauding you. I'll tell everyone what a high minded moderate you are, and you can return to explaining to me about just how these arguments from Tom, Scott and etc are relevant or exculpatory in the case of this issue with Foley and the putative cover up, or how there is some sort of 'other side' that I'm missing.
Okay, you get busy on that high ground, Frank, you moderate guy, you! I'll be down here admiring your deep considered perspective. Yup.
DL
Current Events » in reply to rlimitations in that respect
re: rlimitations in that respect
The whole thread (41 posts)
- So here is a bit of nastiness
- And on those out there defending perversion...
- Cut to the chase.
- "...the dirty little sluts had it coming."
- Yadda yadda yadda. Another attempt to reframe the issue.
- Talk to me, buddy. I'm right here. (n/t)
- re: So here is a bit of nastiness
- And on those out there defending perversion...
