Our tea party friends
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Let us endeavor....
Next: I am Kenneth Gladney
From: MNMikeW on 7 Apr 2010 10:29 "William Clark" <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote in message news:wclark2-99335A.21072006042010(a)charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu... > In article <MPG.26257de173bf8702989d9c(a)news.giganews.com>, > BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > >> In article <0cce1d38-1a83-4b22-ac7b- >> e15a120c0b2a(a)i25g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... >> > >> > On Apr 6, 3:54 am, assimil...(a)borg.org wrote: >> > > On 5-Apr-2010, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: >> > > >> > > > I do not know who or what the SEIU or the UAW are. >> > > >> > > unions: the former is for <cough, cough> public servants, the latter >> > > for >> > > tradesmen >> > > >> > > -- >> > > bill-o >> > >> > The former is not for public servants, it's for hotel and restaurant >> > workers. >> >> John, less than a minutes worth of time and and you could have saved >> yourself some embarassment. But, you will try and weasle your way out >> and say that you were talking about federal government employees. >> >> http://www.seiu.org/a/ourunion/fast-facts.php >> >> Public Services - SEIU is the second largest union of public service >> employees with 850,000 local and state government workers, public school >> employees, bus drivers, and child care providers - 49,000 of which >> joined SEIU in early 2005 in one of the largest union elections in U.S. >> history. > > You see, the man's a genius with Google, isn't he? You sure are not Mr. Plagiarist.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 7 Apr 2010 11:08 On Apr 6, 10:46 pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 07:51:39 +0000, assimilate wrote: > > On 4-Apr-2010, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > >>> Are you trying to claim the NYT isn't biased? > > >> Compared to the Washington Times? Get real. > > > the only difference is the NYT is biased in the same way that you are > > Everybody is biased. It's the degree of bias that matters. You would > have to be incapable of rational thought to seriously equate a cult rag > like the Wash Times to the NYT. The NYT, like the Wash Times, is deliberately biased. The bias is a matter of policy, and both are extreme to my minds eye. I don't see a difference.
From: Dinosaur_Sr on 7 Apr 2010 11:10 On Apr 7, 7:50 am, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- state.edu> wrote: > > I think yu have nailed it right there - "incapable of rational thought" > does it for me. It hasn't worked well for you so far though. You might want to give rational thought a try. Mindless subservience to ideology has reduced you to fool status.
From: William Clark on 7 Apr 2010 14:08 In article <576e9a46-6587-4a6a-8e29-d9f5a33f4c6a(a)r27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > On Apr 6, 10:46�pm, Carbon <nob...(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 07:51:39 +0000, assimilate wrote: > > > On �4-Apr-2010, William Clark <wcla...(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > > > >>> Are you trying to claim the NYT isn't biased? > > > > >> Compared to the Washington Times? Get real. > > > > > the only difference is the NYT is biased in the same way that you are > > > > Everybody is biased. It's the degree of bias that matters. You would > > have to be incapable of rational thought to seriously equate a cult rag > > like the Wash Times to the NYT. > > The NYT, like the Wash Times, is deliberately biased. The bias is a > matter of policy, and both are extreme to my minds eye. I don't see a > difference. Where would you say the political bias of David Brooks lies? Thank you.
From: William Clark on 7 Apr 2010 14:09
In article <a6a86504-f5cf-49ac-a9dc-60af6a673207(a)30g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, Dinosaur_Sr <frostback(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > On Apr 7, 7:50�am, William Clark <cl...(a)nospam.matsceng.ohio- > state.edu> wrote: > > > > > I think yu have nailed it right there - "incapable of rational thought" > > does it for me. > > It hasn't worked well for you so far though. You might want to give > rational thought a try. Mindless subservience to ideology has reduced > you to fool status. Perhaps, but I am al least bright enough to know that there is no such thing as an "x-ray crystallograph". 15-0. |