Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
The shtick was funny at first, then not so much. Fortunately for Wonk, there are still two other longer-running, no-longer-funny shticks still going here.
So, Mr. Pot, may I introduce you to Mr. Kettle?
|
Burger, if, on Wonk's provocation, we had not set up a NRZ, I would ask you why an examination of Arafat or Clinton (and by the use of the singular, I mean both parties to the self-pro-claimed co-presidency) and their misdeeds, philoshophies, hateful statements, crimes and abuses of office are not relevant to current events, but I can't, because we have stipulated past acts have no bearing on the present.
What's odd is, I was watching some talking head show last night with Charles Krauthammer and Juan Williams and some others (one other lib one other conservative) and they were debating writings that Judge Roberts made 20 years ago as a member of Reagan's justice department. Why? Where is the relevancy? If Arafat's words from several years ago as the leader of the Palestinians through several months ago have no bearing or effect on today's Palestinians, what possible insight can be gained from looking at Roberts work-for-hire from twenty years ago?
