You're on. done and done.
Who holds the bet?
Paul Nelson wrote:
Make it interesting. Make it $1,000 and you're on.
Paul Nelson
Cell 708-670-6978
Office 512-392-2577
nelsonp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Booth Martin
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:50 PM
To: Open discussion among iSeries Users
Subject: Re: [CPF0000] Gov Spitzer drops illegals license plan
$100, Paul. $100 bucks sez that if Hillary is elected, by 2013 America
will not have Federally issued drivers licenses in lieu of state licenses.
Paul Nelson wrote:
Any bets that if she gets elected, the process will get federalized?
Paul Nelson
Cell 708-670-6978
Office 512-392-2577
nelsonp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On
Behalf Of Gerald Magnuson
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 12:13 PM
To: Open discussion among iSeries Users
Subject: Re: [CPF0000] Gov Spitzer drops illegals license plan
No. Let's presume that the entire audience was paid big money to ask
softball questions. And that every reporter is on the take too.
What if we don't use your straw man, and discuss what was actually
reported.
At Grinnell College 4 people asked were given the opprountity to ask
questions. According to Muriel Gallo-Chasanoff, the first questioner,
she was given a question to ask Hillary. She also said that another man
was approached to ask a question about "jobs".
On a releated note....
WTF does wanting to be president have to do with giving illegal's state
issued documents?
Gerald Magnuson
-----Original Message-----
From: cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cpf0000-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Buck Calabro
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 11:01 AM
To: Open discussion among iSeries Users
Subject: Re: [CPF0000] Gov Spitzer drops illegals license plan
Asking a question about her switching sides (multiple times) on a
issue
Of national importance, constitutes "vitriol"?
No, and I tried as hard as I could to say that. Here's the whole thing:
I never did understand the vitriol she attracts. This statement of
course isn't nasty but it still confuses me.
What could I have done better?
Have you heard the term, associated with both Clintons,
"triangulation"?
Yes, and it sounds remarkably like the first of my comments:
I've heard her criticized for being robotic and not
voicing an opinion until it was tested out with focus
groups and all that.
Doesn't [it] hurt your argument of Hillary "working out her opinion in
stages", when she and her campaign only allow her answer pre-scripted
questions, from Planted questioners?
No. Let's presume that the entire audience was paid big money to ask
softball questions. And that every reporter is on the take too. The
best case scenario for her to deliver pre-scripted answers to
pre-scripted questions. At every event. She still hasn't managed a
sound bite opinion on drivers licenses for illegals, which is why it
seems reasonable to assert that she's still working out what her stand
ought to be. Now make the audience completely hostile. She still
hasn't got her sound bite. It seems fair to say that the audience
content has little bearing on her ability to formulate an opinion on
the issue. That's my reasoning, I could easily have missed something
along the line though.
--buck
