[asterisk-biz] Re: OT: Gore Still Ahead

[James]

OK,

Send your kid to public school.
If he survives the random shootings and the drugs, then you can send him to 
the District of Columbia to be an aid.
There he can be influenced by powereful men (and women) to do some really 
neat things.
He can live in a city where violent crime is high and civilians can't buy a 
handgun to protect themselves.
While he is learing how to avoid being raped or mugged, he can dodge the 
terrorist plane crashings.

Responsibility starts at home, with the parents.  Would you really want to 
send your child out to play on the "Hill"?
Most aids come from affluent households with educated parents.
I would guess that there's not a one of them that would have morgatged thier 
house and loand Foley the money for a year, but they freely hand over their 
children...

Foley screwed up and I think the latest remarks about alcoholism and being 
molested as a child are copouts.

Yes, it is time to clean house.  Five year term limits for a couple of 
generations will do more to cure these problems than any arguments about 
Republicans or Democrats.

James Taylor



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra at baylink.com>
To: <email at mattruby.com>; "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk 
Discussion" <asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Re: OT: Gore Still Ahead


> On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:03:28AM -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
>> Are you looking for ways to excuse the child molesting Foley did just
>> because he continued carrying on after the boys were legally men?
>
> Let's be *perfectly clear* here, shall we?
>
> "Talking dirty" to them does not constitute "child molestation" under
> any construction of anyone's law that I'm aware of.
>
> And 16 isn't exactly a child, either.
>
>> What kind of depraved child molester protector are you? Other than
>> "Republican" - that much is so obvious that it's redundant. Now tell us
>> that I shouldn't go so hard on Foley, because it's not his fault that
>> god made him gay.
>
> You can go as hard on Foley as you like.  I hope he takes the whole,
> sordid, hypocritical Republican establishment down with him.  just lets
> be hard on him for the right reasons: he owed a duty to his
> constituency not to get embroiled in a scandal, and he owed a duty to
> those pages *specifically*, because he was or had been in a position of
> direct power and control over them.  He failed in those duties.
>
> Would this have been less likely to have happened had he been out about
> his preference?  (For men, I mean, not for boys.)  Yeah, probably.
>
> Is it society's fault that he felt he needed to be even partially in
> the closet?  Yes?
>
> Am *I* gay?  No.
>
> Do I want people to confuse me for Donald Rumsfeld?  Not even on your
> birthday.  :-)
>
> You can tell the repubs apart from the dems because, by and large, the
> dems utilise the tools of rational argument, and are calm and cool, and
> the repubs appeal to emotion, fear, and (dare we say this) terror.
>
> Not all of either side, certainly, but a statistically significant
> majority.
>
> Alas, demagoguery works better with the electorate than pedagogy.
>
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> -- 
> Jay R. Ashworth 
> jra at baylink.com
> Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 
> 2100
> Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 
> e24
> St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 
> 1274
>
> "That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later,
>   they stop having sex with you."  -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_
> _______________________________________________
> --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
>
> asterisk-biz mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
>