Not just to stir the pot (priests/pedophiles, hiding, protecting

[mismused]

delete

 

[mismused]

delete

 

[cantdog]

That's good. I can't see too many of us coming on, grabbin the mic, and croonin, "Well, I think these dedicated and selfless fellas are gettin the short, uh, end. What the hell? You think priests grow on trees? Forgive and forget, right? No harm, no foul, especially if you're not there any more, right?"

I think the RC folks are seeing the handwriting on the wall. This can be outwaited, like so many other things, but I believe the wisdom of a little housecleaning is finally coming clear.

 

[shereads]

Despite the showing of some of these Boston Globe reports, and those in the Cleveland Plain Dealer, some still saw no "proof" that the higher ups were aware of this so-called problem, nor that they "hid" or "moved" such priests.

Mis, I'll make you pay for putting this thread where I could see it. I swear I will! And the best part is, no one will be able to prove I did it.



Item A:

"If you had watched O.J.'s career, you'd know he's too good a person to murder anyone. What do you know about football, anyway?"

~ A former co-worker of SR's

To prove an accusation, you'd have to first get your prove-ees to agree on exactly what needs to be proven, how much evidence will suffice, and how to judge the credibility of evidence. Add the variable of people's willingness or unwillingness to believe, and you might never get that far.

We could easily agree that it's 7:53 p.m. EST, if none of us has an emotional stake in the time of day. But if it means I'm 3 minutes too late to collect my lottery winnings and that my winning ticket has now expired, I'll need to see the expiration date on God's watch battery.

On the back jacket of the book cover, there is the usual list of those who proclaim the book's merits.

A record number of books about a sitting president, by members of his own party including some of his own political appointees - all with disturbingly similar conclusions about his intelligence and integrity - didn't even raise questions among the majority of voters last November, much less prove anything.

The credibility of the authors could never be proven - no matter that the authors of the most disturbing books were Republicans, including at least one life-long conservative. The evidence was assumed to be a web of lies, and therefore not worth reading - no matter than the most damning evidence was lifted directly from the minutes of White House meetings and was never directly disputed by the people quoted.

My brother-in-law refused to read them because, "It's only natural for Democrats to attack the president" and "they just want to sell books." I could have prepared some charts to clarify the distinction between a Democrat and a Republican political appointee, and provided financial records proving that at least two of the authors were rich enough not to care how many books they sold. But I was too busy looking for a plastic grapefruit spoon to claw out my eyes, as a distraction from the pain.

And I did claw them out, and it didn't hurt a bit, and I learned Braille the next afternoon. You can't prove otherwise.

 

[mismused]

delete

 

[mismused]

delete

 

[shereads]

sleep beckoned rudely.

<snip>

Sher, will you let me live long enough until then? Thank you in advance.

mismused

I'm mostly harmless...I think I was supporting your point back there, and that the threat was a triple-sarcasm-loop with a double-backflip dismount. It may have misfired, and appeared to be an actual threat. Also, I might have only dreamed that I was making a point and that it supported yours. Where are we?



I wish sleep would beckon before daybreak.

Do I have to set a trap for it? What kind of bait do you use?

 

[mismused]

delete

 

[Svenskaflicka]

In cartoons, it's easy to spot the bad guys, because they are the ones wearing black and having evil eyes.

In RL, the bad boys hide their evil behind an ivy league sweater, a white collar, or a uniform.

I like the proverb: "No-one is ever as good or as bad as we think they are."