Alan Baker

In article <>,
"MNMikeW" <> wrote:

> "Bobby Knight" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > >>
> > Neither of you have the ability, or knowledge, of clippage? :-)
> > bk
>
> How do you think we got to this point? I clipped too much and all hell
> breaks loose with the Bobsy Twins.

Sorry, Mikie, but I knew you weren't quoting William, and I knew you
also weren't writing what you posted.

William A. T. Clark

In article <>,
"MNMikeW" <> wrote:

> "Bobby Knight" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > >>
> > Neither of you have the ability, or knowledge, of clippage? :-)
> > bk
>
> How do you think we got to this point? I clipped too much and all hell
> breaks loose with the Bobsy Twins.

Aaaaaaw, poor Diddums needs Mumsy again.

MNMikeW

"William A. T. Clark" <> wrote in message
news:clark-...
> In article <>,
> "MNMikeW" <> wrote:
>
>> "Bobby Knight" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>> > >>
>> > Neither of you have the ability, or knowledge, of clippage? :-)
>> > bk
>>
>> How do you think we got to this point? I clipped too much and all hell
>> breaks loose with the Bobsy Twins.
>
> Aaaaaaw, poor Diddums needs Mumsy again.

Such wit. And a single sentence to boot.

assimilate

On 29-Sep-2008, Alan Baker <> wrote:

> > So after complaining that an actual newspaper wasn't sufficiently
>
> Correction: the Huffington Post is an internet only "newspaper" and
> while it apparently leans to the left, when I've used it for a
> reference, its facts have been correct.

Not quite, the Puffington Host is an online community where you can get the
whole spectrum from news to pure partisan opinion. Facts must be sifted out
as with many other blogs.

assimilate

On 29-Sep-2008, Alan Baker <> wrote:

> So after complaining that an actual newspaper wasn't sufficiently
> unbiased, what does Mike post in rebuttal to a point: a hard-core
> rightwing website blog post.

you quote Huffington, I don't see any difference.

Kenn Smith

I have worked on voter registrations and am no great fan of same day
registration. But, if that is the law then that is the law - let it go.

BTW, Warren, the Rethuglican subject line was totally uncalled for and
obviously intended to agitate Republicans, of which I am not one - hard
core independent. An impartial observer, and one capable of ingesting
and evluating facts, you ain't.

Alan Baker

In article <48e28ff5$0$31786$>,
wrote:

> On 29-Sep-2008, Alan Baker <> wrote:
>
> > So after complaining that an actual newspaper wasn't sufficiently
> > unbiased, what does Mike post in rebuttal to a point: a hard-core
> > rightwing website blog post.
>
> you quote Huffington, I don't see any difference.

My quotes are factual and thus verifiable, as I have proven on each
occasion.

William Clark

In article
<alangbaker->,
Alan Baker <> wrote:

> In article
> <clark->,
> "William A. T. Clark" <> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <alangbaker->,
> > Alan Baker <> wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <wclark2->,
> > > William Clark <> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article
> > > > <alangbaker->,
> > > > Alan Baker <> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <>,
> > > > > "MNMikeW" <> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > "William Clark" <> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:wclark2-..
> > > > > > .
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Picture this:
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike once again posting someone else's words, but neglecting the
> > > > > attribution...
> > > > >
> > > > > Let me help:
> > > > >
> > > > > <http://blog.heritage.org/2008/09/15/...io-election-at
> > > > > -r
> > > > > i
> > > > > sk/>
> > > > >
> > > > > So after complaining that an actual newspaper wasn't sufficiently
> > > > > unbiased, what does Mike post in rebuttal to a point: a hard-core
> > > > > rightwing website blog post.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wow.
> > > > >
> > > > Yup, I thought so. And he even tried to make it look like I posted it.
> > >
> > > No. That he didn't do.
> > >
> > > His line:
> > >
> > > '"William Clark" <> wrote in message
> > > news:wclark2-...'
> > >
> > > Would be followed by your text preceded by the quoting characters.
> > >
> > > If each line of the text that followed had been preceded by "> ", then
> > > he would have been trying to make it look like you posted it.
> >
> > Then why was my name on it at all, when he didn't quote a single line of
> > what I posted? I accept it was probably an error, but, added to the fact
> > that he carefully avoided any attribution so that he would not be
> > laughed at for quoting a far right blog, the end result is highly
> > misleading.
>
> I agree it was misleading, I just don't think there was any intent to
> mislead people into thinking it was from you.
>
> As to why he clipped all your text, I think that was just an error.

Yes, I don't think he is competent enough with the newsreader to do it
deliberately.

William Clark

In article
<alangbaker->,
Alan Baker <> wrote:

> In article <>,
> "MNMikeW" <> wrote:
>
> > "Bobby Knight" <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> > > >>
> > > Neither of you have the ability, or knowledge, of clippage? :-)
> > > bk
> >
> > How do you think we got to this point? I clipped too much and all hell
> > breaks loose with the Bobsy Twins.
>
> Sorry, Mikie, but I knew you weren't quoting William, and I knew you
> also weren't writing what you posted.

Yes, the presence of more than a single sentence was a dead giveaway.

William Clark

In article
<alangbaker->,
Alan Baker <> wrote:

> In article <>,
> "MNMikeW" <> wrote:
>
> > "William Clark" <> wrote in message
> > news:wclark2-...
> > > In article
> > > <alangbaker->,
> > > Alan Baker <> wrote:
> > >
> > >> In article <>,
> > >> "MNMikeW" <> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > "William Clark" <> wrote in message
> > >> > news:wclark2-...
> > >> >
> > >> > Picture this:
> > >>
> > >> Mike once again posting someone else's words, but neglecting the
> > >> attribution...
> > >>
> > >> Let me help:
> > >>
> > >> <http://blog.heritage.org/2008/09/15/...election-at-ri
> > >> sk/>
> > >>
> > >> So after complaining that an actual newspaper wasn't sufficiently
> > >> unbiased, what does Mike post in rebuttal to a point: a hard-core
> > >> rightwing website blog post.
> > >>
> > >> Wow.
> > >>
> > > Yup, I thought so. And he even tried to make it look like I posted it.
> >
> > I simply cut too much of your blather, no conspiracy, take a breath. Simply
> > a little right wing spin on your left wing spin. I'm sure the folks from
> > ACORN will be taking up residence on Ohio soon.
>
> What was his spin?
>
> What did he post that wasn't factual?

That seems to have stopped him dead, just like the Ohio Republicans
(who, by the way, have run off to Cincinnati to try to find a US 6th
Circuit Court judge who might be sympathetic to their appeal.)