Let's see how my comprehension skills are Dannybear. I assert you attack Seeker, you just don't like the guy and have no good reason to be so critical of him. Of course I merly lack comprehension skills, right? Hmmm.
>Seeker,
>Up to your old tricks I see.
>You get adament about the most ridiculous statements.
This doesn't seem very complimentary to me, not even civil. It's even confrontational. Or do I mis-read?
>Hell I don't even think Clinton would argue with sunscapes. He was >the most ardent devotee to the 'spin doctor's', poll taker's, than >any other Pres past or present.
Here's where your obvious lack of comprehension come in. Show me where Seeker is singing the praises of Clinton. While you're at it why don't you prove your statement about Clinton here. Try a comparison to oh, I don't know, you pick, Reagan? Nixon? Johnson? Show us the difference in how they operated from Clinton to prove your point.
Then you continue on with this:
>When was the last time you even heard Bush or his spokesman refer to >a poll, if at all, it certainly was not to parse certain word's. >Unlike Clinton, who seemed to be a master at selecting word's that >passed muster with the pollster's, so that he could weasel his way >out of them, knowing full well that he would. 'It all depends on >what the word 'IS' is or was, or whatever, hehe you know what I >mean.' Clinton speak. Lip trembling.
LOL Again you blather on as if Seeker had taken a stand in Clinton's defense or something!! Additionally funny is to see you swallowing the spin of the current admin that they "never" look at polls etc. Hilarious!! Perhaps your historian friend Teejay can explain to you that rulers/politicians have been gauging public opinion for millenia.
You wrap it up with:
>Seeker you want so desperately to be 'the sage' middle of the road >guy. The guy who see's all sides, takes no sides, but ends up, never >knowing what's really going on. You try to hard to be 'brilliant'.
Ah so we get to the heart of it. You come off as a simpleton, Seeker often seems brilliant and it irritates you. I can see your point.
Seeker *is* a middle of the road kind of guy. We use a term called "moderate". I consider myself to be one so I can relate. I do not see though where your assertion applies and that is, primarily, that Seeker is wishy-washy. He states his opinion and explains it, usually to no avail with you.
You said to me:
>In fact I thought Seeker's reply to me was very thoughtful and answered some of my questions to him.
Did I say anything about Seeker's posts/replies? Yes, Seeker's replies are usually thoughtful and do answer questions. Unlike yours.
Julie
