From: jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II)
Newsgroups: tx.politics
Subject: Re: Fetal Brainwaves
Date: 29 Aug 92 23:38:37 GMT
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Distribution: tx
Organization: River Parishes Programming, Austin, Republic of Texas

In article <1992Aug28.193923.8930@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>>I remember that posting.  It wasn't much to write home about.
>
>Ah, so now we remember.  Funny how that works, isn't it?

No, it simply wasn't "incredibly long".  It contained a definition or
two that supported your position.  Big deal.  (<- Oh, and that isn't a
complete sentence either ...)

>>And what is an ARGED?  
>
>Try putting in a 'U'.  It's an old keyboard, John.

Hey, you're a well-paid multi-degreed guy.  Buy a new keyboard.

>>And where is that memory of yours if you can't
>>even remember that his name is spelt Iaccollletttttiiiiiii.  You can
>>spell hipicrit, right?
>
>Gee, does this mean that it's now 'ok' under the John (net.ghod) Haugh
>II Rules of Usenet Etiquette to harp on spelling, grammar, and typos?
>If you get the rest of the net to agree to that, let me know, John. 

Bwhahahahahahah!

You idiot, you are the one that pulls out the grammar flames.  Or don't
you remember the "And that isn't a complete sentence" flame you tossed
back at me.  I don't use grammar and spelling flames because I make so
damned many mistakes of that nature.

So one more time, can you spell hiiplylcrit?

>Yes, you provide them because YOU are innately dishonest and hence
>can't believe that other people wouldn't lie the way you would if you
>thought you could get away with it.  So you twist, distort, and
>selectively quote and try to lie that way, instead.

No, I provide them because I am innately HONEST.  If I make a mistake,
I want to be told about it.  Like I said, if I post something that is
wrong, I want to know what is right so next week I can use that newly
discovered correct position in my next argument.  You can't stand this
because you realize it means I'm right just about all the time.

>Uh, both I and my local library have more important things to do that
>check up on you, John.  I used to assume you were honest.  Your
>behaviour has, however, convinced me that unless I am willing to
>thoroughly research the subject you are talking about myself, I should
>ASSUME that you have selected biased sources and that what you say is
>therefore meaningless.  

Uh, if you don't provide references no one can ever know if what you
are saying is correct.  I provide references.  Providing make-believe
references (or as you say "Maybe you should check your copy of the
Constitution") would be found-out right away.

In the olden days, a warrior raised his right hand as a gesture to any
other warriors he met.  It showed he had nothing in his hand.  Giving
references is similiar - it shows I have nothing up my sleeve.  I have
nothing to hide, if I did, I certainly wouldn't tell you where I got
my information.

>So what?  In case you haven't heard, the singular of data isn't
>anecdote, and one example doesn't do to prove that libraries carry ALL
>magazines.  They don't, because they can't afford to.

You have never heard of inter-library loan, have you?  Again, you are
doing little more than demonstrate that you've never bothered to research
a single thing in your entire life.  You honestly just expect people to
believe you because you are Fred J. McCall.

>No, you provide references and demand them BECAUSE you expect people
>to act the way your impulses tell you to act.  Except, of course, that
>some of us are basically honest, so your initial assumption is bad.

Fred, to this point in history, you have provided two pieces of
verifiable information.  Two.  You have yet to provide any evidence to
support the following claims that you've made -

	* That there were no businesses in South Central LA.
	* That poor people are systematically ripped off for
	  goods and services.
	* That new businesses moving into a poor district will
	  continue this trend.
	* That the cost of doing business in a poor district
	  is greater than the cost of doing business in a
	  wealthier district.
	* That no businesses are going to locate in a poor
	  district, even if money is to be made.
	* That a fetus below the age of 4 or 5 months has no
	  human brainwaves.
	* That a fetus below the age of 4 or 5 months is not
	  able to feel pain.
	  
I was going to go on for a few more lines, but got bored.  In short, you
make claims, and if someone else DISPROVES what you say, you mock them for
being a "net.ghod".  This isn't about "differences in opinion."  This is
about YOU making things up and then getting pissed off because someone else
catches you in a lie.  I admit my mistakes.  I even admit when I'm wrong.
YOU couldn't admit you were wrong if your very life depended on it.

>>But of COURSE what you say is true.  Which is why you don't provide
>>REFERENCES.
>
>References don't make truth, John.  

Of course references don't make truth.  But neither does an unsupported
assertion.  Those points you've asserted above aren't suddenly true because
Fred J. McCall typed them into a computer.  REFERENCES demonstrate that
someone else bothered to examine reality.  That some other group of people
looked at the RESEARCH and agreed with it enought to PUBLISH it.  The
force behind a published survey is not the printing of the survey, but
rather the reputation of the organization which produced the data, and the
reputation of the organization which published it.  If "Joe's Polling Co."
takes a poll which says 97% of White Americans support Adolf Hitler for
President, and the Weekly World News publishes it, there isn't going to be
much credibility placed in that poll.

>Well, I wish you would, because what comes out of your mouth is pretty
>obnoxious.  But then, that's just you, isn't it?

Actually, I'm your worst nightmare.  My sole purpose in life on this
newsgroup is to force you to shut up, or post your references.  You have
already lost credibility with quite a few people in this group.  My goal
is to help you lose credibility with a few more.

>Well, life's a bitch, John.  You figure on dying in the next couple
>weeks? If so, you'll just have to die unfulfilled.

"I'll provide references."  NOT!

>As for the rest, you're just going to have to continue to act like the
>flaming idiot you are for another couple of weeks.  Have fun.

Flaming idiot?  Nah.  I'm the voice of reason and tranquility.
-- 
John F. Haugh II                   | "The US Government has the Midas Muffler
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151            |  touch: everything they touch turns to
UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh |  shit."
Domain: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org      |                  -- Jay Maynard