On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:21:15 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:13:33 -0400, KotP-A
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:29:53 -0400, Gene
wrote:

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 15:37:12 -0400, KotP-A
wrote:

Again, The French system makes a lot of sense. Why are liberals so
against it?

Again. You are jumping on your horse and riding off in about 10
different directions. Either the French system makes a lot of sense as
is or it doesn't. Your objections to what "doesn't make sense" render
the French model meaningless and non-operative. If you want to create
your *own* system and tout it's benefits, fine, but you can't take an
existing system, mentally modify it to your whim and continue to call
it the same thing..... it is different.... how, exactly, is known only
to you.

Besides. You've yet to post the first shred of concrete evidence that
"liberals," who or what ever they are, are "against the French System"
as it actually exists. (Barring a group of extreme lefties in GB.)

Hey Gene, what 'objections' did I pose? I was against the government
running the system. I wasn't against 'cooperation' with the
government. Other than that, I believe I agreed with everything you
pasted.

What are the ten different directions? 'Liberals', in general, are
against nuclear power. How often do you hear 'Bama mentioning it?

Again, show me all the modifications I demanded. Just list three or
four, that should do it.


You've yet to post the first shred of concrete evidence that
"liberals," who or what ever they are, are "against the French System"
as it actually exists. (Barring a group of extreme lefties in GB.)

That's it? Where's the ten different directions? Where are all my
'objections'. Why should I post anything about liberals being against
nuclear power? Why, instead, don't you look real hard and see if you
show that liberals are *for* nuclear power.

You are a piece of cake, my friend.