In article <C457ABD6.BAABF%usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Snit <usenet@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> "Steve Carroll" <trollkiller@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> stated in post
> trollkiller-73E447.08160019052008@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
on 5/19/08 7:16 AM:
>
> Holy cow! Steve Carroll has, finally, after four years of utter and
> complete failure, done enough research to actually keep himself on topic
and
> not run to his straw men, yanking of years-old comments out of context,
> openly lying, pu****ng an Argument from Ignorance... etc. Wow.
>
> Seriously, Steve, I am impressed. I *never* thought I would see the day
you
> would actually do this. Maybe my pointing you to counter- arguments
> helped... maybe it was others coming in and calling you on your BS.
> Whatever the reason I want to truly congratulate you.
Google shows that, among other things, Reid vs Covert was pointed out
you to over 4 years ago... by me and several others:
Here's a reference of it by me to you... on Jan. 22, 2004...
You:
"I am not sure I would say that are subordinate to the Constitution, but
they do not supercede the rest of the Constitution".
Me:
"My point is that no one needs you or I to say it, the SC court has
already made it sufficiently clear. Reid v. Covert provides the
necessary clarification".
Your parroted "argument" has been refuted... many times, by many people.
If you'd lay off mixing medications your memory might come back.
--
"Apple is pu****ng how green this is - but it [Macbook Air] is
clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much
just throw it away". - Snit
|
