Dennis Claxton
On 5/6/2012 3:52 PM, michael yates wrote:
> Perhaps Michael Smith only meant that the quoted comment is impossible to
decipher and was not declaring the person who said it an idiot. Wouldn't it
be better to assume that until you know otherwise?
Perhaps. But I wasn't responding to only one post. I think I've seen enough for the question I posed to be a fair one.
cf. what Doug said.
-------
Well, in the electoral politics of the g-8 nations, what isn't a joke is an emetic.
Carrol
P.S. Late yesterday I discovered that I had 26 posts with that weird subject line in my junk files. I read the ones by shag, by Michael S, & by ravi, which gave me a sampling of the maunderings of others. I guess there's nothing in them worth responding to. There's an old lawyer's joke: If the facts are against you, talk about law; if the law is against you, talk about the facts. If both the law and the facts are against you, talk about the opposing attorney.