Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: for-q-clinton

The post opened with the EXACT wording from the debate moderators re requirements and restrictions, and noting that both sides had signed off on them.

So at least WE here on FR knew the groundrules, yes? Or, most of us did, but for you.

I'm the kind of ass who wonders why people like you toss out an unthought-out response...who wonders why people don't READ the very simple premises most of these threads start with, so they can respond, if not intelligently, at least coherently...who wonders how deep someone's insecurity must reach for you to lash out like that, when clearly you simply mis-read the beginning, or read it too fast.

Most people on this DISCUSSION BOARD, when corrected, have the grace--and security--to simply respond with something like, Shoulda read more carefully, Haven't had my coffee, or Thanks for setting me straight on that.

Most people.


635 posted on 10/03/2004 2:08:38 PM PDT by John Robertson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 410 | View Replies ]


To: John Robertson
Most people on this DISCUSSION BOARD, when corrected, have the grace--and security--to simply respond with something like, Shoulda read more carefully, Haven't had my coffee, or Thanks for setting me straight on that.

Now let's see if you have the grace to apologize after this smack-down. WHEN THIS THREAD STARTED ALL THAT WAS ON DRUDGE WAS A HEADLINE!!!! The part you are reading has since been added. ....let your apology begin :-)

682 posted on 10/03/2004 2:32:36 PM PDT by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 635 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson