Posted by Twibil on March 28, 2009, 8:15 pm
> >> According to our Secretary of State, the U.S. needs to follow the
> >> lead of Mexico when it comes to environmental concerns.
> > Ooh, I missed that one. Cite?
> Part of her speach south of the border very recently...
Erm, Stephen!, that's not a "cite"; which means "provide evidence
other than your own opinion".
For instance, if it turned out to be a cite from The Onion, we'd know
it was meant to be satire. If it were a cite from the new York Times
we could justifiably assume it would have a leftward slant. Or if it
was reported by someone on Faux News we could safely assume it very
likely never happened at all.
Posted by Stephen! on March 28, 2009, 8:42 pm
4996e88aaabb@v1g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>> > Ooh, I missed that one. ÿCite?
>>
>> ÿ Part of her speach south of the border very recently...
>
> Erm, Stephen!, that's not a "cite"; which means "provide evidence
> other than your own opinion".
If you are too lazy to look it up yourself, that's your problem. Her
speech was on all the news outlets. Of course most of them glazed right
over it and commented on how wonderful she looked. You know, the *REAL*
important news.
If you missed it, look it up.
> was reported by someone on Faux News we could safely assume it very
> likely never happened at all.
Ahhhh... Now I get it. You probably *did* hear it but either chose to
ignore it or thought you were having sunshine blown up yer ass.
--
RCOS #7
IBA# 11465
http://imagesdesavions.com
Posted by Chuck Rhode on March 29, 2009, 12:58 am
On Sun, 29 Mar 2009 00:42:43 +0000, Stephen! wrote:
> 4996e88aaabb@v1g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>> Erm, Stephen!, that's not a "cite"; which means "provide evidence
>> other than your own opinion".
> If you are too lazy to look it up yourself, that's your problem.
> Her speech was on all the news outlets. Of course most of them
> glazed right over it and commented on how wonderful she looked. You
> know, the *REAL* important news.
Well ... that's why I asked for a citation of an article worthy of my
attention. All I see on Google is SoS Clinton holding forth on a new
domino theory: Organized crime in Juarez leads to terrorism in El
Paso. There's nothing about our looking to Mexico as a developing
paragon of environmentalism.
--
.. Be Seeing You,
.. Chuck Rhode, Sheboygan, WI, USA
.. Weather: http://LacusVeris.com/WX
.. 30° — Wind NNE 18 mph — Sky overcast. Light snow; mist.
Posted by Twibil on March 29, 2009, 4:14 am
> >> > Ooh, I missed that one. ÿCite?
> >> ÿ Part of her speach south of the border very recently...
> > Erm, Stephen!, that's not a "cite"; which means "provide evidence
> > other than your own opinion".
> If you are too lazy to look it up yourself, that's your problem.
Yeah, everything you post is someone else's problem. Never yours. Are
you related to Sean Hannity, by any chance?
> Her speech was on all the news outlets. Of course most of them glazed right
> over it and commented on how wonderful she looked. You know, the *REAL*
> important news.
Ahem. Here's the entire text of her speech. Would you kindly point out
where she says anything like that? Because I just read it and there's
no such statement included.
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/03/120905.htm
> If you missed it, look it up.
I did. Your turn. Show us what she said, where she said it, and
provide the context it was spoken in.
And, BTW, if it *was* said, and was just part of the normal pat-each-
other-on-the-back fancy speechifying that diplomats *always* pass back
and forth like party favors before they get down to the bare-knuckles
brawl part of the mission, it means absolutely *nothing*: just like
complimenting an ugly woman doesn't mean you really think she's a
knock-out. You're just being polite.
If, on the other hand, Clinton delivered an official policy statement
from the Obama administration saying that the US was going to be
following Mexico's lead in the area of ecology, you should be
*thrilled*!
Because it would mean that Obama was planning on letting big business
do things to the environment that would have horrified Dick Cheney.
> > was reported by someone on Faux News we could safely assume it very
> > likely never happened at all.
> Ahhhh... Now I get it. You probably *did* hear it but either chose to
> ignore it or thought you were having sunshine blown up yer ass.
Sure. "Chose to ignore it".
What a maroon.
Posted by Stephen! on March 29, 2009, 1:30 pm
b2147a1471b7@v1g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
> Ahem. Here's the entire text of her speech. Would you kindly point out
> where she says anything like that? Because I just read it and there's
> no such statement included.
>
> http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/03/120905.htm
So you are confusing her public speech with her interview following the
meeting. No wonder you can't find her comments on how wonderful the
mexicans are treating the environment.
--
RCOS #7
IBA# 11465
http://imagesdesavions.com
> >> lead of Mexico when it comes to environmental concerns.
> > Ooh, I missed that one. Cite?
> Part of her speach south of the border very recently...