Gore's lies

[kelley]

At 12:54 AM 10/13/00 -0400, Matt Cramer wrote:
>On Thu, 12 Oct 2000, kelley wrote:
>
> > 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!

you are SOOOOOOOO easy.

really, you need to work on uhm...uhm work on holding off a little long 
before giving it all up for the snit.

rotflmao.

kelley