Re: Is Palin's blood libel sacred? was oh please

For the sake of arguing, of course! Duh!  ; )

Johne Cook
| http://raygunrevival.com | http://authorculture.blogspot.com |


On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 4:49 PM, pcg <[email protected]> wrote:

> > I didn’t say that.
>
> That's why I said it *appears* to be what you're saying, and asked for
> clarification.
>
> > Peter commented that people are arguing over her words.
> >
> > I am just pointing out that as point of interest it is unremarkable give
> their
> > history of attacking anything she does.
>
> Well, no, you *didn't* just point it out as unremarkable. You
> explicitly said Peter's statement was "pointless." And I see now that
> you either didn't mean what you wrote, or can't justify what it
> entails. With an position that amorphous, I can't help but wonder why
> you'd argue the point in the first place.
>
> --
> -pcg
>  [email protected]
>
> --
> dadl-ot mailing list
> http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot
>

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot