Posted by: pire April 20, 2011
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
Sugam,
Well, what can I say. I don't even understand your arguments. You are nervous and you are acting like one of those relatives of our corrupt politicians.
"I think your mother should be in jail for boring an illegitmate son like you. I can call you names like that as well."
What does it have to do with the discussion at hand? It just shows how nervous you are.
"I had been reading your comments for a long time, and I had thought you were one of the intellectual types, but I am convinced you are otherwise."
What has this argument got to do with the discussion at hand, again? I don't give a hoot what you think of me. I am not here to make friends. I say what I think is correct. If you disagree, just write your arguments.
"Now, you can argue that Mr. Adhikari did not win the election, but he did fight in the election and received quite a bit of votes unlike some people who were nominated by the party. But this is a much better argument than just calling him names."
And this is how you are defending him? Doesn't it sound hallow to you?
In reality, you admit that the man didn't win election and yet found a way to manipulate (corrupt) the system. The man also found a way to send his daughter abroad in scholarship though she hardly did deserve it.May be you want to justify it by saying "oh, this is what other leaders too do", but for me, it is just a corruption. BMA has a long list of questions to answer for, and this recent one about VAT and Khanal is one of those questions.
Well, what can I say. I don't even understand your arguments. You are nervous and you are acting like one of those relatives of our corrupt politicians.
"I think your mother should be in jail for boring an illegitmate son like you. I can call you names like that as well."
What does it have to do with the discussion at hand? It just shows how nervous you are.
"I had been reading your comments for a long time, and I had thought you were one of the intellectual types, but I am convinced you are otherwise."
What has this argument got to do with the discussion at hand, again? I don't give a hoot what you think of me. I am not here to make friends. I say what I think is correct. If you disagree, just write your arguments.
"Now, you can argue that Mr. Adhikari did not win the election, but he did fight in the election and received quite a bit of votes unlike some people who were nominated by the party. But this is a much better argument than just calling him names."
And this is how you are defending him? Doesn't it sound hallow to you?
In reality, you admit that the man didn't win election and yet found a way to manipulate (corrupt) the system. The man also found a way to send his daughter abroad in scholarship though she hardly did deserve it.May be you want to justify it by saying "oh, this is what other leaders too do", but for me, it is just a corruption. BMA has a long list of questions to answer for, and this recent one about VAT and Khanal is one of those questions.