LOL, Neo!
I knew as well as you, because he wrote it out plain as day!
He did not write, ""E, since I take exception to what you have been saying, I shall join the argument!"
What he wrote received this reply from me, and in it I show that I did, indeed, understand exactly what he wrote-- and what he did not write:
I do believe, haqihana, that it goes without saying that when anyone posts on any public thread, anyone else may engage them in argument. It is usually called "replying," and I have never, ever, heard it threatened in advance as "swift retaliation," following a "declaration" that someone will be declared one's "enemy," if that someone doesn't follow your instructions-- together with a rather surprising reference to other threads, before. Have you?
Perhaps you feel uncomfortable assenting to the word "threatened"?
Feel free to substitute the word "promised."
It was an attempt to intimidate, Neocon. Deny that only if you have no shame.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On another subject. The poll-driven, chameleon Mr. Gore has company, it seems:
newsmax.com
Bush & GOP Abandon Elian
John LeBoutillier
Monday May 1, 2000
Here are two paragraphs from two recent news stories about
the Elian affair that portend badly for George W. Bush and the
Republican Party:
1. From Saturday?s New York Daily News: "A top Republican
Party official told The Daily News that Bush campaign manager
Joe Allbaugh informed Senate Republicans on Thursday that the
candidate wanted the hearings scrapped because the issue is a
political loser," reported the paper.
2. From today?s Washington Post: "A key Senate Republican
acknowledged Sunday that Congress may never hold hearings
on whether the government used excessive force to seize Elian
Gonzalez and return him to his father.?
What this means is that the Republican leadership is listening to
George W. Bush?s campaign strategists so closely that they are
ignoring their constitutional duty to oversee the executive branch.
In other words, Bush is willing to sacrifice Elian in order to have a
better chance to win in November.
This is the kind of thinking that was exactly why his father lost
and why he may lose, too.
Indeed polls may show that a majority of people favor the raid
and the forced return of Elian to his Cuban masters, but those
polls do not measure intensity of conviction. In other words,
maybe only 35 percent favor keeping Elian here, but those 35
percent really want to win this issue.
Bush, like his father before him, secretly has disdain for
"committed conservatives.? The Bushes are NOT conservative,
even though W. has had to embrace the right like a lifesaver
during his tussle with John McCain.
In fact, the Bushes are mere opportunists. Anyone who fell for
President Bush?s alleged love of pork rinds and country music
was a gullible fool. How could a preppie who wears
interchangeable madras watchbands truly love country music?
President Bush deliberately lied when he adopted a
Reaganesque tone and promised, "Read my lips: no new taxes.?
That approach was simply to get the conservatives to support
him. Then, once in office, he disdainfully raised taxes with no
announcement other than a press release posted on the wall of
the White House Press Room.
W. Bush is no different. All the previous talk about Elian was just
that ? all talk. Now that Bush and his party can dig into this
issue through congressional hearings, he suddenly believes that
"it is a political loser.?
This opportunism and cynicism is positively Clintonian!
Why do Bush and the congressional leaders such as Trent Lott
and Speaker Dennis Hastert think they are in office? To merely
keep those offices ? or to do something while in office?
There are two kinds of people who go into politics: those who
want to be a somebody and those who want to do something.
The Bushes, father and son, do not particularly care about doing
something. They are more interested in getting power. But I ask
you, what is the point of devoting years and years of effort,
campaigning, fundraising and travelling ? all to obtain power ?
if you will not use that power to change things for the better?
Ronald Reagan was the exact opposite of the Bushes. "Dutch"
was in politics totally to do something. He was secure enough
that he did not need politics to salve his ego.
Not so the Bushes. Their entire purpose is to acquire power just
to have done it. President Bush wanted to prove his mettle by
becoming president. Now his namesake wants to prove himself
Dad?s equal by also becoming president.
What a waste!
The Republican Party used as a plaything for adult adolescents
with an identity crisis!
Meanwhile Elian?s fate rests with those of us who want to fight
for him.
What a shame that the Republican Party does not want to join
that fight. |
