In your response, you then asked “Specifically, what would he have done? TIA”
I chose not to answer your question, as the answer was readily evident in the material that I referenced.
I simply don't follow your cut and paste material, and I did read those earlier comments, but I don't understand what that phrase means... your response reminds me of those little kids in the school yard who would say, "Well, if you don't know, then I'm not telling you." Is that your game? You apologize for your sarcasm, and then you immediately follow it up with more of the same? You "choose not to answer?" What??? What am I missing here?
So, when it comes down once again to the hard core nuts and bolts of what Ron Paul would actually do, you "choose" to avoid a direct answer to my direct question... you can copy and paste all day and night, if you can't put it into your own words, then maybe you too do not understand it...
And further, if you respond by choosing not to address a direct question, then I wonder why I bother to ask you, clearly you have no interest in educating me...
Be advised, this thread is open to anyone who wants to share and enlighten others, bu if you "choose" to shut the door, then either you have nothing more to say or are playing word games with me, either is not acceptable...
If I ask a direct question, I would expect the courtesy of a direct answer, I always respond accordingly... so, I ask, what would Ron Paul have done as a result of the 9/11 attacks and what is his current policy regarding combating this threat? TIA
I suggest you put the games aside or just take it elsewhere, I'm not interested in playing word games... thanks...
GZ™ |
