Fact checking

Damian Gerow dgerow at afflictions.org
Mon Apr 26 10:44:38 PDT 2004


Thus spake sunder (sunder at sunder.net) [26/04/04 13:38]:
: >Hey, I'm no fan of Tipper either.  And I'm not saying that Al Gore was a
: >/good/ choice.  But in retrospect, he probably would have been a lesser 
: >evil
: >than the current president.
: 
: THAT, ultimately is the meta-point.  You shouldn't have to vote for the 
: lesser evil, but when your choice is so vastly limited, why even bother 
: voting?

Okay, you've completely missed my point.  I'll repeat it one last time, then
I shall contribute no more to this inane diatribe:

I don't give a flying fuck who you vote for, who the options are, what you
think of them, or even if they're convicted drunk drivers hell-bent on
converting the world to their belief system (...).

I was pointing out that your one presented argument (in the e-mail I read)
was completely not true.  Al Gore did *not* claim to invent the Internet,
and to use that false argument as a reason to dislike him is to be either
purposefully dishonest, or honestly misled.  I was simply correcting your
facts, and suggesting you check them out before you believe everything you
see/read in mass media.

The rest of your arguments are simply your opinions, and all I have to say
is: what little you knew of Bush and Gore /before/ the elections has no
bearing on the amount of information available about them.  Their histories
(criminal, educational, political, and family) were all very publicly
available.  Just because you (and, dare I say, a vast majority of the
American public) didn't want to do your research on your candidates, does
not mean that the facts weren't there.

You're also sadly, sadly mistaken in saying that there's only two options.
I guess it shows that you didn't vote.

  - Damian





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list