DB> BR> who are avaricions, murderous, honorable, deceitful, and just all
 DB> BR> around horses asses.  Eventually they get replaced by something
 DB> BR> else.  I'm not going
 DB> True... keep in mind I sort out why someone uses rhetoric based around 
 DB> the words responsible and obligation then wonder why. Turns out 
 DB> usually they, or their own, have something to gain from the action of 
 DB> the victim, which in the usual case, is the person to whom they are 
 DB> directing the "responsibility" clause.  
The worst kind of junkie is a power junkie.  There are money junkies, sex 
junkies, drug junkies, and then those who get off on deciding what is good 
for 
someone else and having the clout to force it upon that someone else.  
 DB> One of my favorite phrases when I was younger was "who protects us 
 DB> from our protectors?"
Who will guard the guardians?  ight now our protectors seem bent on supplying 
a world free of risk, responsibility, and, incidentally, any incentive to 
excel.  We have only to look to some of the socialist nations in Europe to 
see 
what this gets us.
 DB> BR> I hope this doesn't come off as a personal attack, for it si not
 DB> BR> so intended.  For now, I'll shut up.
 DB> Not to worry. You seem very honorable yourself and have a legitimate 
 DB> viewpoint. I don't take this as a personal attack. You perspective is 
 DB> just as valid as mine or anyone elses.
Thank you.  
Somehow I knew you'd take it as meant.
--- AdeptXBBS v1.11z (FREEWare/2)
---------------