On Sun, 22 May 2005 17:05:50 -0400, "Harry.Krause"
wrote:

John H wrote:
On Sun, 22 May 2005 16:24:25 -0400, "Harry.Krause"
wrote:


John H wrote:

On Sun, 22 May 2005 15:21:53 -0400, "Harry.Krause"
wrote:



John H wrote:



Did you not read the post I made? I regurgitated it to show you that it was an
'anti-Krause' post, not a right-wing post at all. The point was that there is no
reason for you to castigate all conservatives simply because a few folks here
think you're a ....

I don't castigate "All" conservatives here.


Well, when you use phrases like 'mindless righties', don't you think one could
get the impression that you *do*?



Only if one is a mindless rightie. Those few who aren't mindless
righties know who they are.

As an example, there's Karl Denninger. I don't like him much, and I like
his positions on issues even less, but he certainly isn't a mindless
rightie. But I do castigate him. But, then, that wasn't your query.

Perhaps you need a list? :]


I suppose the concept of simply not calling names is anathema to you?



Isn't it enough for you, John, that I don't "play" with the mindless
righties here?

You don't consider mentioning names in every other post you make 'playing'? You
say you can determine the 'direction' of the abuse from the folks you
continuously name just by reading the headers. Yet, the headers of the threads
seldom give *any* indication of the anti-Krause rhetoric contained therein.

It seems more like you read the posts then start calling the same folks names in
'response' to another's post.

--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)