You weren't asking the questions, save in a rhetorical sense
And you went way, way beyond this. The questions Rumsfeld pose are nothing like the sort of bogus objections you raise. He's moderate. You're over the top. That's one difference. Another difference is he looks at both sides, and you don't. Biggest difference of all: he's interested in constructive answers, and you're not.
Rumsfeld knows the difference between legitimate questioning and rhetorical bullshit. You don't. And you don't care, either.
Nice try, passing yourself off as some sort of objective poser of queries. You're not fit to lick Rumsfeld's shoes.
On, that thing I said about pearls before swine? You're one of the swine. As exemplified by what you're trying to do with the pearls.
----------------------------------------------------------------
DEAL WITH IT.
Compromise is for suckers. Seeking a middle ground is what led to 9/11.
"I do not want to be admired by scumbags and liars and wife beaters. I want to be admired by good and decent, intelligent and just people, and in order to achieve this I need to do things that make me despised by their opposites." - Bill Whittle
Never mind all the mass graves. Where's the nerve gas?
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfire...arlowe/index.html]
