> At 05:00 PM 10/12/00 -0400, JKSCHW at aol.com wrote:
> >Although some of the alleged lies are so absurd and easily refuted that
> >one thinks it would be counterproductive to accuse G of them. --jks
>
> nah. those came from another list where they went unrefuted and were, as
> far as i know, taken as the Word. no one questioned the veracity of any of
> them,
This representation is not accurate. The "list of lies" is obviously propaganda (not necessarily 100% false propaganda), and not worthy of discussion.
That you mistake recognition of that as acceptance of the veracity of the article is, well, silly.
> my guess is that the strategy is to use the Internet to disseminate this
> sort of thing and build up support or lack thereof for candidates on the
> basis of seemingly serious and accurate statements.
Yes, Clinton went after the eMpTV crowd, and now the GOP is going after hackerdom. And you think it is working. Now who is the conspiracy nutter! ROTFLMAO!
Hack the vote,
Matt
-- Matt Cramer <cramer at voicenet.com> http://www.voicenet.com/~cramer/ In small proportions we just beauties see, And in short measures life may perfect be.
-Ben Johnson