The problem with addressing your points, is that you don't really have any. You just say stuff. They aren't "points."
e-Bill: I am tired, tired, tired of your incessant support of Benito Mussolini, Jack the Ripper and Imelda Marcos as implied by your failure to criticize them here.
Now that I think of it, e-Bill, I have never read any criticism from you of Manuel Noriega. And what about David Duke? What about Kurt Waldheim? I have never read any criticism by you of any of these individuals, e-Bill. This is an outrage, I feel.
I wasn't comparing Gore's dishonesty to Reagan's, exactly. I was comparing his delusions to Reagan's delusions. Gore is both delusional and a liar, I suspect. In fact, I don't "hate" Reagan and never did. It's the wrong verb. I have (and had) much more nuanced feelings about the poor man. (Nuance is not your strong suit, I'm aware.)
I must point out that "just because he's a chauvinist" is not my description of Olasky's limitations as an "ethics advisor" to a president of the United States, it is yours.
"Do you get sick of bashing" liars? I don't. Liars or morons or nutjobs of whatever party. I somehow just never get sick of it. It must be awfully uncomfortable to only feel free to bash the liars and morons and nutjobs of one party, and to feel obligated to blind yourself to the creepiness of the representatives of the other. The fact is, our choice in the next election is between a lying nut and a smirking moron. |
