No new definition. Look up "chronology".
You refused to post that you didn't support it.
Later, after it became apparent even to you that this was an unsupportable plan, you changed your tune and decided to not support it anymore.
Otherwise, how do you explain that you posted a link to someone claiming that including animal control would protect our food supply from terrorists?
In addition...that post was a response to this one where you felt the urge to tell me you watched crossfire...without bothering to at least give a relevent snip...after I told you that Lieberman was just on Cspan telling the camera's that Bush's plan and his proposal were damn near the same.No. I did not tell you that I watched crossfire. I got that off the CNN website.
As for your point about Lieberman, if you will recall, I had previously pointed out that you seemed overly concerned with who was supporting the plan rather than what the plan was.
You Lieberman link is more proof of that.
Again, if you opposed the plan AT THAT TIME, why were you busy pointing out to me who supports it?
That prompted a semantics rant on your part where you claimed to have ripped my position to shreds...because it was "bush's" actual plan instead of Lieberman's "really close" (his own words) plan.It wasn't a claim. It was a fact.
Again, you seem to be obsessively focuses on who supports this plan. But now you claim to oppose it. But you're still linking to your posts pointing out all the people who support it.
Yet you haven't linked to any posts where you point out anyone who opposes it.
Very strange behaviour.
Or are you indicating your opposition by pointing out the "bad" people who support this plan?
Does that make Bush and Lieberman "bad" people, in your opinion?
And if calling Bob T an asshole means I support GW's plan....I've been a supporter of the plan since long before 9/11...since Bob's one of >my guys (NJ)< in Washington...and he >is< an asshole.Well, you're starting to see the whole picture.
When you started, you were focusing on the people who were supporting this plan (or ones similar to it, in their own words).
You were posting links to people who attempted to justify things like including animal control in the plan.
You would not say you opposed the plan.
You were posting all of those in response to other people's posts in which they opposed the plan.
But you really oppose the plan.
What is it that you didn't like? That people were saying Bush was fascist for proposing this?
Allow me to kill this thread now.
Hitler proposes a Nazi regime.
People say Hitler is a fascist.
You say that OTHER people have proposed SIMILAR plans.
You provide links to people who justify the specifics of Hitler's plan.
And that SOMEHOW, in YOUR mind, translates to you opposing Hitler's plan?
Now....
Bush proposes a plan.
People say it is fascist.
You say that OTHER people have proposed SIMILAR plans.
and so forth.
And you think that >I< am the one with the problem?
godwin
