ROTFLMAO
"someone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
You need to spend some time in a school to gain some enlightenment, sport.
The only weapons policy unarguable (or so it should be) by an idiot attorney
or stay-at-work parent is zero tolerance.
Learning the rules of language and mathematics is pretty much the same as
learning any others - a matter of self-discipline.
"someone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I can see it now- the kid takes that top picture to school, to prove to
> his buds that his dad is a freakin genius, and gets suspended under an
> "enlightened" Zero Tolerance policy. No wait, suspension is for crayon
> drawings of small arms and such; this being almost a WMD, expulsion should
> be in order...
>
>
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 20:47:01 -0700, Tim Douglass wrote:
> This looks like a fun project!
>
> http://www.gizmology.net/tanks.htm
>
I can see it now- the kid takes that top picture to school, to prove to
his buds that his dad is a freakin genius, and gets suspended under an
"enlightened" Zero Tolerance policy. No wait, suspension is for crayon
drawings of small arms and such; this being almost a WMD, expulsion should
be in order...
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 11:43:12 +0000, George wrote:
> You need to spend some time in a school to gain some enlightenment,
> sport.
Why? Do you find mere condescension to be a valid substitute for a
rational argument? Did you learn that in a school?
> The only weapons policy unarguable (or so it should be) by an idiot
> attorney or stay-at-work parent is zero tolerance.
>
sorry, but I'm having a hard time parsing the above. Are you saying that a
zero tolerance policy is the only policy against which there is no
argument (by stay-at-work parent or idiot attorney)? So a professional
homemaker, telecommuter, or smart attorney could submit an effective
rebuttal?
However, since "unarguable" is an adjective, the only correct way I can
read your sentence is "The only <unarguable> weapons policy (or so it
should be) by an idiot attorney or stay-at-work parent is zero
tolerance.", which doesn't make much sense. I'm left to infer something
along the lines of "the only indisputable weapons policy (created) by an
idiot attorney or stay-at-work parent is zero tolerance"- is this what
you're getting at? How does being created by an idiot put it beyond
question? Why is a working parent == an idiot attorney? Does your
parenthetical "or so it should be" imply you agree with this policy, which
was created by idiot attorneys?
> Learning the rules of language and mathematics is pretty much the same
> as learning any others - a matter of self-discipline.
>
Now that is perfectly clear, and unarguable- I suggest you repeat it while
looking in the mirror.
> "someone" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> I can see it now- the kid takes that top picture to school, to prove to
>> his buds that his dad is a freakin genius, and gets suspended under an
>> "enlightened" Zero Tolerance policy. No wait, suspension is for crayon
>> drawings of small arms and such; this being almost a WMD, expulsion
>> should be in order...
>>
>>