<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_22_1738232</id>
	<title>Florida Congressman Wants Blogging Critic Fined, Jailed</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1261506420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>vvaduva writes <i>"Florida Rep. Alan Grayson <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/22/grayson-wants-critic-jailed-claiming-constituent/">wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail</a>, all over her use of the word 'my' on her blog.  In a four-page letter sent to [US Attorney General Eric] Holder, Grayson accuses blogger Angie Langley of lying to federal elections officials and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years. Her lie, according to Grayson, is that she claims to be one of his constituents. Langley, Grayson says, is misrepresenting herself by using the term 'my' in the Web site's name."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>vvaduva writes " Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail , all over her use of the word 'my ' on her blog .
In a four-page letter sent to [ US Attorney General Eric ] Holder , Grayson accuses blogger Angie Langley of lying to federal elections officials and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years .
Her lie , according to Grayson , is that she claims to be one of his constituents .
Langley , Grayson says , is misrepresenting herself by using the term 'my ' in the Web site 's name .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>vvaduva writes "Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail, all over her use of the word 'my' on her blog.
In a four-page letter sent to [US Attorney General Eric] Holder, Grayson accuses blogger Angie Langley of lying to federal elections officials and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years.
Her lie, according to Grayson, is that she claims to be one of his constituents.
Langley, Grayson says, is misrepresenting herself by using the term 'my' in the Web site's name.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528554</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261474620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's the problem: we have a large minority of this country, the right wing conservative fundamentalists, who would like to install a taliban type theocracy. they are traitors. the proper thing to do is go after them with RICO, and prosecute, convict, and jail or execute their leaders (including george bush and tick cheney (sp), and fine their organizations to bankruptcy. bye bye republican party. the democrats are only politicians (not a great label but tolerable), the republicans and their cronies are sociopathic criminals. sleep deprived, abused as children, indoctrinated into a violent, intolerant belief system. read ayn rand: she advocated terrorism in her movel the fountainhead, and believed normal people would condone it. healthy societies GET RID of dangerous people. axe murderers, child molesters, and republicans (most of them, that is). hey, its fun to be a troll, i should do this more often.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's the problem : we have a large minority of this country , the right wing conservative fundamentalists , who would like to install a taliban type theocracy .
they are traitors .
the proper thing to do is go after them with RICO , and prosecute , convict , and jail or execute their leaders ( including george bush and tick cheney ( sp ) , and fine their organizations to bankruptcy .
bye bye republican party .
the democrats are only politicians ( not a great label but tolerable ) , the republicans and their cronies are sociopathic criminals .
sleep deprived , abused as children , indoctrinated into a violent , intolerant belief system .
read ayn rand : she advocated terrorism in her movel the fountainhead , and believed normal people would condone it .
healthy societies GET RID of dangerous people .
axe murderers , child molesters , and republicans ( most of them , that is ) .
hey , its fun to be a troll , i should do this more often .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's the problem: we have a large minority of this country, the right wing conservative fundamentalists, who would like to install a taliban type theocracy.
they are traitors.
the proper thing to do is go after them with RICO, and prosecute, convict, and jail or execute their leaders (including george bush and tick cheney (sp), and fine their organizations to bankruptcy.
bye bye republican party.
the democrats are only politicians (not a great label but tolerable), the republicans and their cronies are sociopathic criminals.
sleep deprived, abused as children, indoctrinated into a violent, intolerant belief system.
read ayn rand: she advocated terrorism in her movel the fountainhead, and believed normal people would condone it.
healthy societies GET RID of dangerous people.
axe murderers, child molesters, and republicans (most of them, that is).
hey, its fun to be a troll, i should do this more often.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528452</id>
	<title>Re:Website no longer necessary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261474140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yah, never heard of this guy before hearing this story. Now I know about him and that he appears to be a complete prick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yah , never heard of this guy before hearing this story .
Now I know about him and that he appears to be a complete prick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yah, never heard of this guy before hearing this story.
Now I know about him and that he appears to be a complete prick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527422</id>
	<title>Due Process</title>
	<author>realsilly</author>
	<datestamp>1261513920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Innocent until proven guilty....</p><p>The representative can go after her all he likes, it's for a court to decide if she's innocent or guilty of lying in the use of PAC funds and whether or not the use of 'my' in the name of her site deems fraud.</p><p>I can't say whether her use of PAC funds were used properly, but I would certainly agree with her stance that your congressman is your congressman for your state regardless of which district your from.  I could see much better use of taxpayer monies than persuing this blogger.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Innocent until proven guilty....The representative can go after her all he likes , it 's for a court to decide if she 's innocent or guilty of lying in the use of PAC funds and whether or not the use of 'my ' in the name of her site deems fraud.I ca n't say whether her use of PAC funds were used properly , but I would certainly agree with her stance that your congressman is your congressman for your state regardless of which district your from .
I could see much better use of taxpayer monies than persuing this blogger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Innocent until proven guilty....The representative can go after her all he likes, it's for a court to decide if she's innocent or guilty of lying in the use of PAC funds and whether or not the use of 'my' in the name of her site deems fraud.I can't say whether her use of PAC funds were used properly, but I would certainly agree with her stance that your congressman is your congressman for your state regardless of which district your from.
I could see much better use of taxpayer monies than persuing this blogger.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527908</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>dkleinsc</author>
	<datestamp>1261515420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The AP and Reuters are pretty unbiased, mostly because they tend to omit anything that would involve opinion of any kind. They aren't the most in-depth or interesting reads, but if you're looking for just-the-facts reporting they are usually pretty good. Basically, the wire services will tell you what happened. Period. End of story. They won't tell you much if anything about why it happened, how it happened, who will benefit from it happening, who didn't want it to happen, and so on, but if all you want to know is what happened, they're a pretty good place to start.</p><p>The trouble is, if you're looking for all the stuff the wire reports leave out, the people who are most willing to talk to a reporter about that issue are those with an axe to grind about it. If they're academics, then their careers are staked on particular sets of theories, so any answer they give will ensure that the universe changes to conform to their theory. If they're a think tank or non-profit, they will attempt to match the views of their donors. If they're a politician or one of his aides, then they're going to be going with whatever will improve their chances of reelection. If they're a business, they'll go with whatever will make them the most cash. And so on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The AP and Reuters are pretty unbiased , mostly because they tend to omit anything that would involve opinion of any kind .
They are n't the most in-depth or interesting reads , but if you 're looking for just-the-facts reporting they are usually pretty good .
Basically , the wire services will tell you what happened .
Period. End of story .
They wo n't tell you much if anything about why it happened , how it happened , who will benefit from it happening , who did n't want it to happen , and so on , but if all you want to know is what happened , they 're a pretty good place to start.The trouble is , if you 're looking for all the stuff the wire reports leave out , the people who are most willing to talk to a reporter about that issue are those with an axe to grind about it .
If they 're academics , then their careers are staked on particular sets of theories , so any answer they give will ensure that the universe changes to conform to their theory .
If they 're a think tank or non-profit , they will attempt to match the views of their donors .
If they 're a politician or one of his aides , then they 're going to be going with whatever will improve their chances of reelection .
If they 're a business , they 'll go with whatever will make them the most cash .
And so on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The AP and Reuters are pretty unbiased, mostly because they tend to omit anything that would involve opinion of any kind.
They aren't the most in-depth or interesting reads, but if you're looking for just-the-facts reporting they are usually pretty good.
Basically, the wire services will tell you what happened.
Period. End of story.
They won't tell you much if anything about why it happened, how it happened, who will benefit from it happening, who didn't want it to happen, and so on, but if all you want to know is what happened, they're a pretty good place to start.The trouble is, if you're looking for all the stuff the wire reports leave out, the people who are most willing to talk to a reporter about that issue are those with an axe to grind about it.
If they're academics, then their careers are staked on particular sets of theories, so any answer they give will ensure that the universe changes to conform to their theory.
If they're a think tank or non-profit, they will attempt to match the views of their donors.
If they're a politician or one of his aides, then they're going to be going with whatever will improve their chances of reelection.
If they're a business, they'll go with whatever will make them the most cash.
And so on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526812</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527730</id>
	<title>The Royal We</title>
	<author>Bysshe</author>
	<datestamp>1261514760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Suck <i>my</i> balls. <br> <br>and by my I mean the royal "my". Our collective scrotum should be sucked by this congressman.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Suck my balls .
and by my I mean the royal " my " .
Our collective scrotum should be sucked by this congressman .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Suck my balls.
and by my I mean the royal "my".
Our collective scrotum should be sucked by this congressman.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527048</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>fiannaFailMan</author>
	<datestamp>1261512600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And OF COURSE,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. forgets to add  "D-Fla" to the Reps name.</p><p>Anyone think, even for a second, if Grayson was "R-Fla" that it would have been missed?</p><p>Yeah, didn't think so.</p><p>This is what conservatives and libertarians mean when we are talking about "liberal bias" in the media.  Those soft, subtle things used to quietly tweak the story to emphasize or de-emphasize precisely the point of view the writer wants his or her readers to end up with after reading the story.</p><p>Interestingly, TFA is from <b>Fox News, which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal, regardless of the party they are in</b>, including this one.</p><p>Nice omission there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p></div><p>Are you fucking kidding me? Fox 'News' can be relied on to <a href="http://mediamatters.org/research/200610130010" title="mediamatters.org">mislabel a Republican</a> [mediamatters.org] involved in a scandal with a D almost every time the story breaks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And OF COURSE , / .
forgets to add " D-Fla " to the Reps name.Anyone think , even for a second , if Grayson was " R-Fla " that it would have been missed ? Yeah , did n't think so.This is what conservatives and libertarians mean when we are talking about " liberal bias " in the media .
Those soft , subtle things used to quietly tweak the story to emphasize or de-emphasize precisely the point of view the writer wants his or her readers to end up with after reading the story.Interestingly , TFA is from Fox News , which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal , regardless of the party they are in , including this one.Nice omission there /.Are you fucking kidding me ?
Fox 'News ' can be relied on to mislabel a Republican [ mediamatters.org ] involved in a scandal with a D almost every time the story breaks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And OF COURSE, /.
forgets to add  "D-Fla" to the Reps name.Anyone think, even for a second, if Grayson was "R-Fla" that it would have been missed?Yeah, didn't think so.This is what conservatives and libertarians mean when we are talking about "liberal bias" in the media.
Those soft, subtle things used to quietly tweak the story to emphasize or de-emphasize precisely the point of view the writer wants his or her readers to end up with after reading the story.Interestingly, TFA is from Fox News, which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal, regardless of the party they are in, including this one.Nice omission there /.Are you fucking kidding me?
Fox 'News' can be relied on to mislabel a Republican [mediamatters.org] involved in a scandal with a D almost every time the story breaks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531386</id>
	<title>Re:This seems silly on the surface</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261489020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Fox is spinning it to be more sensational than it is for ratings.</p></div><p>Oh, almost certainly, but that doesn't change the fact that Grayson's motive is to silence a critic. Regardless of the legality of the criticism, he's still being a childish dick.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fox is spinning it to be more sensational than it is for ratings.Oh , almost certainly , but that does n't change the fact that Grayson 's motive is to silence a critic .
Regardless of the legality of the criticism , he 's still being a childish dick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fox is spinning it to be more sensational than it is for ratings.Oh, almost certainly, but that doesn't change the fact that Grayson's motive is to silence a critic.
Regardless of the legality of the criticism, he's still being a childish dick.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528284</id>
	<title>Oops</title>
	<author>Trailer Trash</author>
	<datestamp>1261473480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone forgot to mention Grayson's party affiliation.  "Democrat" for those still wondering.  "Republican" would have been part of the headline had it been so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone forgot to mention Grayson 's party affiliation .
" Democrat " for those still wondering .
" Republican " would have been part of the headline had it been so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone forgot to mention Grayson's party affiliation.
"Democrat" for those still wondering.
"Republican" would have been part of the headline had it been so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526508</id>
	<title>Worthless</title>
	<author>Shadow7789</author>
	<datestamp>1261510620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it's just me, but I felt like the author just looked up "Operating Systems" on Wikipedia and picked out the ones he liked.  I mean really, Windows ME?  We all know it sucked, but it wasn't in the last decade, and making a "exception" for it just makes the author sound uninformed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's just me , but I felt like the author just looked up " Operating Systems " on Wikipedia and picked out the ones he liked .
I mean really , Windows ME ?
We all know it sucked , but it was n't in the last decade , and making a " exception " for it just makes the author sound uninformed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's just me, but I felt like the author just looked up "Operating Systems" on Wikipedia and picked out the ones he liked.
I mean really, Windows ME?
We all know it sucked, but it wasn't in the last decade, and making a "exception" for it just makes the author sound uninformed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528748</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't all voters constituents in a sense?</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1261475520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I mean, why shouldn't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people?</i></p><p>In my opinion you should have the right to write him a letter or email, but not contribute to his election campaign. In fact Bill Gates, a resident of Washington State, has far more pull with Illinois politicians than I as a registered voter in Illinois do. If I had my way, you wouldn't be allowed to contribute to any candidate you're not eligible to vote for, and you wouldn't be allowed to "contribute" to more than one candidate in any race.</p><p>But just send him your views? Of course you should be able to. He shouldn't be forced to read them, but nobody should be able to stop you from sending them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , why should n't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people ? In my opinion you should have the right to write him a letter or email , but not contribute to his election campaign .
In fact Bill Gates , a resident of Washington State , has far more pull with Illinois politicians than I as a registered voter in Illinois do .
If I had my way , you would n't be allowed to contribute to any candidate you 're not eligible to vote for , and you would n't be allowed to " contribute " to more than one candidate in any race.But just send him your views ?
Of course you should be able to .
He should n't be forced to read them , but nobody should be able to stop you from sending them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, why shouldn't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people?In my opinion you should have the right to write him a letter or email, but not contribute to his election campaign.
In fact Bill Gates, a resident of Washington State, has far more pull with Illinois politicians than I as a registered voter in Illinois do.
If I had my way, you wouldn't be allowed to contribute to any candidate you're not eligible to vote for, and you wouldn't be allowed to "contribute" to more than one candidate in any race.But just send him your views?
Of course you should be able to.
He shouldn't be forced to read them, but nobody should be able to stop you from sending them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526812</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Please enlighten us on what news source is not biased? Every professional news source is in the news management business as opposed to the news reporting business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Please enlighten us on what news source is not biased ?
Every professional news source is in the news management business as opposed to the news reporting business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please enlighten us on what news source is not biased?
Every professional news source is in the news management business as opposed to the news reporting business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527796</id>
	<title>Re:Grayson should be impeached</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1261515000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I'm trolling, eh? Looks like Grayson's not the only Democrat that's pro-censorship, we have plenty of them here at slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 'm trolling , eh ?
Looks like Grayson 's not the only Democrat that 's pro-censorship , we have plenty of them here at slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I'm trolling, eh?
Looks like Grayson's not the only Democrat that's pro-censorship, we have plenty of them here at slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527542</id>
	<title>childish?</title>
	<author>sunfly</author>
	<datestamp>1261514280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>So.... Apparently the site is dead on with this "childish" claim?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So.... Apparently the site is dead on with this " childish " claim ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So.... Apparently the site is dead on with this "childish" claim?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531292</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261488180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you cant speak about current ones, because they STILL have time to fulfill their promises(if the GOP would LET them do it, that is. but they're to busy denying change so they can run a smear campaign in 3 years "look obama brought NO change"</p><p>thanks shitty politicians</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you cant speak about current ones , because they STILL have time to fulfill their promises ( if the GOP would LET them do it , that is .
but they 're to busy denying change so they can run a smear campaign in 3 years " look obama brought NO change " thanks shitty politicians</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you cant speak about current ones, because they STILL have time to fulfill their promises(if the GOP would LET them do it, that is.
but they're to busy denying change so they can run a smear campaign in 3 years "look obama brought NO change"thanks shitty politicians</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528694</id>
	<title>This is easy...</title>
	<author>withears</author>
	<datestamp>1261475220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>So Ms. Langley claims to be in Grayson's district, but she isn't?

Seems pretty clear to me.

Just change your website to be MyCongressmanIsNuts.com to be ThoseOtherFolksCongressmanIsNuts.com</htmltext>
<tokenext>So Ms. Langley claims to be in Grayson 's district , but she is n't ?
Seems pretty clear to me .
Just change your website to be MyCongressmanIsNuts.com to be ThoseOtherFolksCongressmanIsNuts.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Ms. Langley claims to be in Grayson's district, but she isn't?
Seems pretty clear to me.
Just change your website to be MyCongressmanIsNuts.com to be ThoseOtherFolksCongressmanIsNuts.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1261511520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything has a bias to it.  Slashdot has a libertarian leaning bias, Dailykos has a left bias and Fox News is right leaning.  It is the reader's job to look critically at what other people say and decide for themselves regardless of the political slant.  As for leaving off the D-fla next to his name, I'd say that you could look at it two ways: 1) a party shouldn't be singled out in media or 2) party affiliation is irrelevant; the conduct of a particular congress critter is what is important.  Mostly I'd say that 2) is most correct as much of the problem in politics is that people mindlessly vote along party lines eg. republicans/democrats as a whole are evillll instead of crosscritter X is specifically an arsehat.  It's irrational.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything has a bias to it .
Slashdot has a libertarian leaning bias , Dailykos has a left bias and Fox News is right leaning .
It is the reader 's job to look critically at what other people say and decide for themselves regardless of the political slant .
As for leaving off the D-fla next to his name , I 'd say that you could look at it two ways : 1 ) a party should n't be singled out in media or 2 ) party affiliation is irrelevant ; the conduct of a particular congress critter is what is important .
Mostly I 'd say that 2 ) is most correct as much of the problem in politics is that people mindlessly vote along party lines eg .
republicans/democrats as a whole are evillll instead of crosscritter X is specifically an arsehat .
It 's irrational .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything has a bias to it.
Slashdot has a libertarian leaning bias, Dailykos has a left bias and Fox News is right leaning.
It is the reader's job to look critically at what other people say and decide for themselves regardless of the political slant.
As for leaving off the D-fla next to his name, I'd say that you could look at it two ways: 1) a party shouldn't be singled out in media or 2) party affiliation is irrelevant; the conduct of a particular congress critter is what is important.
Mostly I'd say that 2) is most correct as much of the problem in politics is that people mindlessly vote along party lines eg.
republicans/democrats as a whole are evillll instead of crosscritter X is specifically an arsehat.
It's irrational.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526700</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The linked article is by <b>any news organization</b>, the media arm of the <b>one party or another</b>. That alone should make you question every word of the article.</p></div></blockquote><p>FTFY</p><p>Really -- you'd just accept MSNBC, CNN, or ABC at face value? If so, go to:  <a href="http://www.guspashoisnuts.com/" title="guspashoisnuts.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.guspashoisnuts.com/</a> [guspashoisnuts.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The linked article is by any news organization , the media arm of the one party or another .
That alone should make you question every word of the article.FTFYReally -- you 'd just accept MSNBC , CNN , or ABC at face value ?
If so , go to : http : //www.guspashoisnuts.com/ [ guspashoisnuts.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The linked article is by any news organization, the media arm of the one party or another.
That alone should make you question every word of the article.FTFYReally -- you'd just accept MSNBC, CNN, or ABC at face value?
If so, go to:  http://www.guspashoisnuts.com/ [guspashoisnuts.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30532258</id>
	<title>Question</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261499280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is it when a Republican does something wrong and yo uhave a new posting about it, it always mentions Republican X. But when a Democrat does something wrong, the word Democrat is no place to be found?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it when a Republican does something wrong and yo uhave a new posting about it , it always mentions Republican X. But when a Democrat does something wrong , the word Democrat is no place to be found ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it when a Republican does something wrong and yo uhave a new posting about it, it always mentions Republican X. But when a Democrat does something wrong, the word Democrat is no place to be found?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494</id>
	<title>Grayson should be impeached</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1261510620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, she should sue him for civil rights violations; specifically, her first amendment rights. This man has no place in government (TFA didn't say if he's a federal congresscritter or a state guy)</p><p><i>He apologized in October for calling a female adviser to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke a "whore."<br></i><br>She should sue for slander. Get this guy out of government and into the poorhouse!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , she should sue him for civil rights violations ; specifically , her first amendment rights .
This man has no place in government ( TFA did n't say if he 's a federal congresscritter or a state guy ) He apologized in October for calling a female adviser to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke a " whore .
" She should sue for slander .
Get this guy out of government and into the poorhouse !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, she should sue him for civil rights violations; specifically, her first amendment rights.
This man has no place in government (TFA didn't say if he's a federal congresscritter or a state guy)He apologized in October for calling a female adviser to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke a "whore.
"She should sue for slander.
Get this guy out of government and into the poorhouse!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526836</id>
	<title>Re:Grayson should be impeached</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1261511760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's in the house of representatives in the 8th district of Florida.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's in the house of representatives in the 8th district of Florida .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's in the house of representatives in the 8th district of Florida.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531594</id>
	<title>Apparently, a lot of people can't follow links</title>
	<author>scot4875</author>
	<datestamp>1261491060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To everyone who thinks that this case really is about her 'blog' (I hesitate to call it a blog -- it's really just a poor homepage that looks like it was ripped out of the 90s) or the use of 'my': you fail.  You did exactly what Fox News wanted, you took their word for granted without question and didn't dig any further to find the real story.  You will keep repeating the misrepresented version of the story until it becomes "truth" to enough people that the actual truth doesn't matter.</p><p>Please, take a look at yourself in the mirror and realize, "yes, I am part of the problem."</p><p>To those who went a little further and think it's a free speech issue: I'm with you 100\% on the whole free speech thing, but this isn't the issue here.  Lose the knee-jerk reactions and calls for impeachment.  IMHO, If someone is going to organize a PAC whose stated goal and only reason for existence is to influence an election, they'd damn well better follow the exact letter of the law.  I'd much rather this wasn't used to go after some 2-bit organization like Langley's, but it's too dangerous of a precedent to set to *not* go after this sort of clear electoral fraud.</p><p>--Jeremy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To everyone who thinks that this case really is about her 'blog ' ( I hesitate to call it a blog -- it 's really just a poor homepage that looks like it was ripped out of the 90s ) or the use of 'my ' : you fail .
You did exactly what Fox News wanted , you took their word for granted without question and did n't dig any further to find the real story .
You will keep repeating the misrepresented version of the story until it becomes " truth " to enough people that the actual truth does n't matter.Please , take a look at yourself in the mirror and realize , " yes , I am part of the problem .
" To those who went a little further and think it 's a free speech issue : I 'm with you 100 \ % on the whole free speech thing , but this is n't the issue here .
Lose the knee-jerk reactions and calls for impeachment .
IMHO , If someone is going to organize a PAC whose stated goal and only reason for existence is to influence an election , they 'd damn well better follow the exact letter of the law .
I 'd much rather this was n't used to go after some 2-bit organization like Langley 's , but it 's too dangerous of a precedent to set to * not * go after this sort of clear electoral fraud.--Jeremy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To everyone who thinks that this case really is about her 'blog' (I hesitate to call it a blog -- it's really just a poor homepage that looks like it was ripped out of the 90s) or the use of 'my': you fail.
You did exactly what Fox News wanted, you took their word for granted without question and didn't dig any further to find the real story.
You will keep repeating the misrepresented version of the story until it becomes "truth" to enough people that the actual truth doesn't matter.Please, take a look at yourself in the mirror and realize, "yes, I am part of the problem.
"To those who went a little further and think it's a free speech issue: I'm with you 100\% on the whole free speech thing, but this isn't the issue here.
Lose the knee-jerk reactions and calls for impeachment.
IMHO, If someone is going to organize a PAC whose stated goal and only reason for existence is to influence an election, they'd damn well better follow the exact letter of the law.
I'd much rather this wasn't used to go after some 2-bit organization like Langley's, but it's too dangerous of a precedent to set to *not* go after this sort of clear electoral fraud.--Jeremy</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498</id>
	<title>Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>d3ac0n</author>
	<datestamp>1261510620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And OF COURSE,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. forgets to add  "D-Fla" to the Reps name.</p><p>Anyone think, even for a second, if Grayson was "R-Fla" that it would have been missed?</p><p>Yeah, didn't think so.</p><p>This is what conservatives and libertarians mean when we are talking about "liberal bias" in the media.  Those soft, subtle things used to quietly tweak the story to emphasize or de-emphasize precisely the point of view the writer wants his or her readers to end up with after reading the story.</p><p>Interestingly, TFA is from Fox News, which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal, regardless of the party they are in, including this one.</p><p>Nice omission there<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And OF COURSE , / .
forgets to add " D-Fla " to the Reps name.Anyone think , even for a second , if Grayson was " R-Fla " that it would have been missed ? Yeah , did n't think so.This is what conservatives and libertarians mean when we are talking about " liberal bias " in the media .
Those soft , subtle things used to quietly tweak the story to emphasize or de-emphasize precisely the point of view the writer wants his or her readers to end up with after reading the story.Interestingly , TFA is from Fox News , which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal , regardless of the party they are in , including this one.Nice omission there / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And OF COURSE, /.
forgets to add  "D-Fla" to the Reps name.Anyone think, even for a second, if Grayson was "R-Fla" that it would have been missed?Yeah, didn't think so.This is what conservatives and libertarians mean when we are talking about "liberal bias" in the media.
Those soft, subtle things used to quietly tweak the story to emphasize or de-emphasize precisely the point of view the writer wants his or her readers to end up with after reading the story.Interestingly, TFA is from Fox News, which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal, regardless of the party they are in, including this one.Nice omission there /.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531706</id>
	<title>News for nerds? Stuff that matters!?</title>
	<author>Zarn</author>
	<datestamp>1261492080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you Timothy, for rolling out the red carpet for all the batshit crazy<br>
&nbsp; commenters by promoting a foxnews fabrication on Slashdot. I've been<br>
&nbsp; lurking for years but you got me mad enough to post now.</p><p>Check your F-ing sources. Get a second and a third source. Foxnews<br>does not get the benefit of the doubt, not on Slashdot.</p><p>What were you THINKING??</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you Timothy , for rolling out the red carpet for all the batshit crazy   commenters by promoting a foxnews fabrication on Slashdot .
I 've been   lurking for years but you got me mad enough to post now.Check your F-ing sources .
Get a second and a third source .
Foxnewsdoes not get the benefit of the doubt , not on Slashdot.What were you THINKING ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you Timothy, for rolling out the red carpet for all the batshit crazy
  commenters by promoting a foxnews fabrication on Slashdot.
I've been
  lurking for years but you got me mad enough to post now.Check your F-ing sources.
Get a second and a third source.
Foxnewsdoes not get the benefit of the doubt, not on Slashdot.What were you THINKING?
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526772</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Besides, the domain name makes sense from a different context: the viewer's. When a viewer in his district goes there, it would be ostensibly be *their* congressman. It's like "MyFreeCreditReport.com" or "MyCorporation.com" or whatever. They're not claiming ownership -- they're offering service for the viewer, with a name relative to the viewer.</p><p>Should we sue Intuit because they're claiming ownership of corporations created at mycorporation.com?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Besides , the domain name makes sense from a different context : the viewer 's .
When a viewer in his district goes there , it would be ostensibly be * their * congressman .
It 's like " MyFreeCreditReport.com " or " MyCorporation.com " or whatever .
They 're not claiming ownership -- they 're offering service for the viewer , with a name relative to the viewer.Should we sue Intuit because they 're claiming ownership of corporations created at mycorporation.com ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Besides, the domain name makes sense from a different context: the viewer's.
When a viewer in his district goes there, it would be ostensibly be *their* congressman.
It's like "MyFreeCreditReport.com" or "MyCorporation.com" or whatever.
They're not claiming ownership -- they're offering service for the viewer, with a name relative to the viewer.Should we sue Intuit because they're claiming ownership of corporations created at mycorporation.com?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528440</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>yurtinus</author>
	<datestamp>1261474140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe we can take this a step further and say "24 hour news makes me want to puke." Really, my life is not *that* boring that I need to know every detail about somebody who did that one thing that was kind of interesting that one time....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe we can take this a step further and say " 24 hour news makes me want to puke .
" Really , my life is not * that * boring that I need to know every detail about somebody who did that one thing that was kind of interesting that one time... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe we can take this a step further and say "24 hour news makes me want to puke.
" Really, my life is not *that* boring that I need to know every detail about somebody who did that one thing that was kind of interesting that one time....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529690</id>
	<title>Re:Oops</title>
	<author>thelexx</author>
	<datestamp>1261479300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That has to be the lamest post I've seen in years from such a low numbered user.  Congrats.  Keep being part of the problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That has to be the lamest post I 've seen in years from such a low numbered user .
Congrats. Keep being part of the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That has to be the lamest post I've seen in years from such a low numbered user.
Congrats.  Keep being part of the problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529104</id>
	<title>Re:What law?</title>
	<author>Zeelan</author>
	<datestamp>1261476720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>She is in a PAC. When she formed it she misrepresented the scope and intent of her political action comity. The jail time they are talking about isn't about what she says, but what she signed on the dotted line when she summited to the Fed for Tax Exempt status. Lying on that form 'will' get you in very hot water. Part of the group of laws designed to keep corruption out of the government.

AKA, there are limits to the number and types of contributions she can take in if she formed the PAC with the correct documentation, scope, and intent.

Regardless, her site wouldn't get her in anything nearly that kind of trouble if she was spending her own money and time on the site and not making an official representation and taking in donations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>She is in a PAC .
When she formed it she misrepresented the scope and intent of her political action comity .
The jail time they are talking about is n't about what she says , but what she signed on the dotted line when she summited to the Fed for Tax Exempt status .
Lying on that form 'will ' get you in very hot water .
Part of the group of laws designed to keep corruption out of the government .
AKA , there are limits to the number and types of contributions she can take in if she formed the PAC with the correct documentation , scope , and intent .
Regardless , her site would n't get her in anything nearly that kind of trouble if she was spending her own money and time on the site and not making an official representation and taking in donations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She is in a PAC.
When she formed it she misrepresented the scope and intent of her political action comity.
The jail time they are talking about isn't about what she says, but what she signed on the dotted line when she summited to the Fed for Tax Exempt status.
Lying on that form 'will' get you in very hot water.
Part of the group of laws designed to keep corruption out of the government.
AKA, there are limits to the number and types of contributions she can take in if she formed the PAC with the correct documentation, scope, and intent.
Regardless, her site wouldn't get her in anything nearly that kind of trouble if she was spending her own money and time on the site and not making an official representation and taking in donations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527854</id>
	<title>Re:Grayson should be impeached</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1261515180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, she should sue him for civil rights violations; specifically, her first amendment rights. This man has no place in government (TFA didn't say if he's a federal congresscritter or a state guy)</p></div><p>How did the congressman prevent her from her first amendment right? She got to give her opinion.  He didn't stop it - so there is no lawsuit.<br>
With regards to your title - please tell me you are not one of those idiots who says "impeachment" anytime they don't like what someone does? Impeachment, in this country, only happens when someone breaks a very serious law.  Speeding won't qualify...selling national secrets will qualify.  This is closer to speeding ticket then national secrets.<br>
I would say that yuo need to learn the law before you type, but in reality your comments are just nonsense and make no sense.<br> <br>

If anything, the blog poster lied (she is not a constituant), she did so with the intent to make him lose votes (and thusly his job), and she is a member of the opposing party which helps to show her intent.  He just may have legal cause against this blogger - though in the end he will suffer more then she will.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , she should sue him for civil rights violations ; specifically , her first amendment rights .
This man has no place in government ( TFA did n't say if he 's a federal congresscritter or a state guy ) How did the congressman prevent her from her first amendment right ?
She got to give her opinion .
He did n't stop it - so there is no lawsuit .
With regards to your title - please tell me you are not one of those idiots who says " impeachment " anytime they do n't like what someone does ?
Impeachment , in this country , only happens when someone breaks a very serious law .
Speeding wo n't qualify...selling national secrets will qualify .
This is closer to speeding ticket then national secrets .
I would say that yuo need to learn the law before you type , but in reality your comments are just nonsense and make no sense .
If anything , the blog poster lied ( she is not a constituant ) , she did so with the intent to make him lose votes ( and thusly his job ) , and she is a member of the opposing party which helps to show her intent .
He just may have legal cause against this blogger - though in the end he will suffer more then she will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, she should sue him for civil rights violations; specifically, her first amendment rights.
This man has no place in government (TFA didn't say if he's a federal congresscritter or a state guy)How did the congressman prevent her from her first amendment right?
She got to give her opinion.
He didn't stop it - so there is no lawsuit.
With regards to your title - please tell me you are not one of those idiots who says "impeachment" anytime they don't like what someone does?
Impeachment, in this country, only happens when someone breaks a very serious law.
Speeding won't qualify...selling national secrets will qualify.
This is closer to speeding ticket then national secrets.
I would say that yuo need to learn the law before you type, but in reality your comments are just nonsense and make no sense.
If anything, the blog poster lied (she is not a constituant), she did so with the intent to make him lose votes (and thusly his job), and she is a member of the opposing party which helps to show her intent.
He just may have legal cause against this blogger - though in the end he will suffer more then she will.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527564</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261514400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It looks somewhat legit, though that bias was a bit obvious -- the guy is a Democrat.</p><p>If he had been a Republican, would Fox have said anything?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It looks somewhat legit , though that bias was a bit obvious -- the guy is a Democrat.If he had been a Republican , would Fox have said anything ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It looks somewhat legit, though that bias was a bit obvious -- the guy is a Democrat.If he had been a Republican, would Fox have said anything?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529262</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1261477380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a difference between bias, and pandering.</p><p>Yes there is bias everywhere, but that doesn't mean you don't take action to minimize it, instead Fox news holds it up with intentional lies.</p><p>FOX news is the worst, by far.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a difference between bias , and pandering.Yes there is bias everywhere , but that does n't mean you do n't take action to minimize it , instead Fox news holds it up with intentional lies.FOX news is the worst , by far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a difference between bias, and pandering.Yes there is bias everywhere, but that doesn't mean you don't take action to minimize it, instead Fox news holds it up with intentional lies.FOX news is the worst, by far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530736</id>
	<title>Can I sue Microsoft too?</title>
	<author>brianc</author>
	<datestamp>1261484340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I sue Microsoft too?   They seem to always claim it's 'My Computer'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I sue Microsoft too ?
They seem to always claim it 's 'My Computer' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I sue Microsoft too?
They seem to always claim it's 'My Computer'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529098</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1261476720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it had been a (R) every news organization would have already covered it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... in spades<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... on the Front Page or lead in on the nightly news.</p><p>Can you imagine what would happen to a (R) if they called someone a WHORE on TV?</p><p>Yeah, they would have been driven from office in no short order. So, yeah, if you want to talk about bias, it isn't just what you report, but how, and to what end.</p><p>When 15 people show up for "Liberal" protest, the news reports "Dozens", when 5000 conservatives do the same thing, "some" showed up.</p><p>And don't get me started on the whole White Racist Gun Toting Teabaggin protester, who turned out to be a black guy. Oh, there is no bias in the nightly news.</p><p>FOX NEWS is balance, when you have a "tingly feeling running down your leg" as fare on the other channels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it had been a ( R ) every news organization would have already covered it ... in spades ... on the Front Page or lead in on the nightly news.Can you imagine what would happen to a ( R ) if they called someone a WHORE on TV ? Yeah , they would have been driven from office in no short order .
So , yeah , if you want to talk about bias , it is n't just what you report , but how , and to what end.When 15 people show up for " Liberal " protest , the news reports " Dozens " , when 5000 conservatives do the same thing , " some " showed up.And do n't get me started on the whole White Racist Gun Toting Teabaggin protester , who turned out to be a black guy .
Oh , there is no bias in the nightly news.FOX NEWS is balance , when you have a " tingly feeling running down your leg " as fare on the other channels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it had been a (R) every news organization would have already covered it ... in spades ... on the Front Page or lead in on the nightly news.Can you imagine what would happen to a (R) if they called someone a WHORE on TV?Yeah, they would have been driven from office in no short order.
So, yeah, if you want to talk about bias, it isn't just what you report, but how, and to what end.When 15 people show up for "Liberal" protest, the news reports "Dozens", when 5000 conservatives do the same thing, "some" showed up.And don't get me started on the whole White Racist Gun Toting Teabaggin protester, who turned out to be a black guy.
Oh, there is no bias in the nightly news.FOX NEWS is balance, when you have a "tingly feeling running down your leg" as fare on the other channels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527564</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527938</id>
	<title>Alan Grayson seems pretty nuts to me...</title>
	<author>moz25</author>
	<datestamp>1261515480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... for never hearing about the Streisand effect. I've never heard of the guy before.</p><p>So, in my opinion Alan Grayson *is* nuts, just for a different reason<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... for never hearing about the Streisand effect .
I 've never heard of the guy before.So , in my opinion Alan Grayson * is * nuts , just for a different reason : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... for never hearing about the Streisand effect.
I've never heard of the guy before.So, in my opinion Alan Grayson *is* nuts, just for a different reason :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529088</id>
	<title>I think it's valid</title>
	<author>CranberryKing</author>
	<datestamp>1261476660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>And whether or not you agree with the method, Grayson's position on issues (unrelated in this context), or whatever, this shouldn't have been tagged as censorship. They could have said 'that' senator is nuts.
<p>

Separately, I think the Constitution should have a provision that states that no one in Congress (or any federal position for that matter) should have any legal recourse against anything stated about them other than their own explanation or response. A person whom voluntarily steps into public service, should not only NOT have a MORE privileged status than the common citizenry, they should have a LESS privileged status.
</p><p>
However currently, there are no such laws.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And whether or not you agree with the method , Grayson 's position on issues ( unrelated in this context ) , or whatever , this should n't have been tagged as censorship .
They could have said 'that ' senator is nuts .
Separately , I think the Constitution should have a provision that states that no one in Congress ( or any federal position for that matter ) should have any legal recourse against anything stated about them other than their own explanation or response .
A person whom voluntarily steps into public service , should not only NOT have a MORE privileged status than the common citizenry , they should have a LESS privileged status .
However currently , there are no such laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And whether or not you agree with the method, Grayson's position on issues (unrelated in this context), or whatever, this shouldn't have been tagged as censorship.
They could have said 'that' senator is nuts.
Separately, I think the Constitution should have a provision that states that no one in Congress (or any federal position for that matter) should have any legal recourse against anything stated about them other than their own explanation or response.
A person whom voluntarily steps into public service, should not only NOT have a MORE privileged status than the common citizenry, they should have a LESS privileged status.
However currently, there are no such laws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526722</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Trepidity</author>
	<datestamp>1261511460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you prefer, <a href="http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/news\_politics/2009/12/grayson-wants-to-send-critic-to-jail-for-five-years.html" title="orlandosentinel.com">this</a> [orlandosentinel.com] and <a href="http://www.cfnews13.com/Politics/FloridaDecides/2009/12/19/grayson\_wants\_critic\_put\_in\_jail.html" title="cfnews13.com">this</a> [cfnews13.com] predate the Fox story by several days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you prefer , this [ orlandosentinel.com ] and this [ cfnews13.com ] predate the Fox story by several days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you prefer, this [orlandosentinel.com] and this [cfnews13.com] predate the Fox story by several days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529434</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261478160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Correction: Dailykos has a moderate right bias, and Fox has a right-of-Mussolini bias. We don't have an active left wing in this country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Correction : Dailykos has a moderate right bias , and Fox has a right-of-Mussolini bias .
We do n't have an active left wing in this country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correction: Dailykos has a moderate right bias, and Fox has a right-of-Mussolini bias.
We don't have an active left wing in this country.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527738</id>
	<title>Add a slash to the URL</title>
	<author>starglider29a</author>
	<datestamp>1261514820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Add a slash to the URL, so that it's MyCongressmanIsNuts.com/Grayson. Repeat 434 times, once for each congressman.<br> <br>

Fixed that for ya.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Add a slash to the URL , so that it 's MyCongressmanIsNuts.com/Grayson .
Repeat 434 times , once for each congressman .
Fixed that for ya .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add a slash to the URL, so that it's MyCongressmanIsNuts.com/Grayson.
Repeat 434 times, once for each congressman.
Fixed that for ya.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529392</id>
	<title>It's about time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261477980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's nice to see a conservative finally get called out on their lies.</p><p>After the last eight years of impunity, conservatives don't even try hiding their lies anymore, they just do it.  Now that adults are back in charge, maybe accountability can slowly creep back in to the country.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's nice to see a conservative finally get called out on their lies.After the last eight years of impunity , conservatives do n't even try hiding their lies anymore , they just do it .
Now that adults are back in charge , maybe accountability can slowly creep back in to the country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's nice to see a conservative finally get called out on their lies.After the last eight years of impunity, conservatives don't even try hiding their lies anymore, they just do it.
Now that adults are back in charge, maybe accountability can slowly creep back in to the country.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528664</id>
	<title>Anyone who speaks truth will sound a bit crazy.</title>
	<author>TheRealRainFall</author>
	<datestamp>1261475100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 - 1860)

"Concision means you have to be able to say things between two commercials. Now that&rsquo;s a structural property of our media&mdash;a very important structural property which imposes conformism in a very deep way, because if you have to meet the condition of concision, you can only either repeat conventional platitudes or else sound like you are from Neptune That is, if you say anything that&rsquo;s not conventional, it&rsquo;s going to sound very strange." -- Noam Chomsky</htmltext>
<tokenext>" All truth passes through three stages .
First , it is ridiculed .
Second , it is violently opposed .
Third , it is accepted as being self-evident .
" Arthur Schopenhauer ( 1788 - 1860 ) " Concision means you have to be able to say things between two commercials .
Now that    s a structural property of our media    a very important structural property which imposes conformism in a very deep way , because if you have to meet the condition of concision , you can only either repeat conventional platitudes or else sound like you are from Neptune That is , if you say anything that    s not conventional , it    s going to sound very strange .
" -- Noam Chomsky</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"All truth passes through three stages.
First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed.
Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
"
Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 - 1860)

"Concision means you have to be able to say things between two commercials.
Now that’s a structural property of our media—a very important structural property which imposes conformism in a very deep way, because if you have to meet the condition of concision, you can only either repeat conventional platitudes or else sound like you are from Neptune That is, if you say anything that’s not conventional, it’s going to sound very strange.
" -- Noam Chomsky</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527044</id>
	<title>Website no longer necessary</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1261512540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Langley criticizes Grayson on her Web site for his "inappropriate behavior" and "childish approach" toward governing, and claims he "does not represent the values of central Florida."</i> Grayson has pretty much made her case for her with this inappropriate and childish attack on her web site. The term "Streisand Effect" also comes to mind. I hope mycongressmanisnuts.com carries advertising, 'cause this dick move is going to drive a metric shitload of traffic to the site!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Langley criticizes Grayson on her Web site for his " inappropriate behavior " and " childish approach " toward governing , and claims he " does not represent the values of central Florida .
" Grayson has pretty much made her case for her with this inappropriate and childish attack on her web site .
The term " Streisand Effect " also comes to mind .
I hope mycongressmanisnuts.com carries advertising , 'cause this dick move is going to drive a metric shitload of traffic to the site !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Langley criticizes Grayson on her Web site for his "inappropriate behavior" and "childish approach" toward governing, and claims he "does not represent the values of central Florida.
" Grayson has pretty much made her case for her with this inappropriate and childish attack on her web site.
The term "Streisand Effect" also comes to mind.
I hope mycongressmanisnuts.com carries advertising, 'cause this dick move is going to drive a metric shitload of traffic to the site!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526472</id>
	<title>While Grayson can be entertaining</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He can also be a jackass.  Jail for a website?</p><p>If only congress had people like him who were standing up on the right side of the issues.  This and other comments (health care == Holocaust??) show he's a nut.</p><p>*sarcasm* Thanks Florida.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He can also be a jackass .
Jail for a website ? If only congress had people like him who were standing up on the right side of the issues .
This and other comments ( health care = = Holocaust ? ?
) show he 's a nut .
* sarcasm * Thanks Florida .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He can also be a jackass.
Jail for a website?If only congress had people like him who were standing up on the right side of the issues.
This and other comments (health care == Holocaust??
) show he's a nut.
*sarcasm* Thanks Florida.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526672</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>eln</author>
	<datestamp>1261511280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Interestingly, TFA is from Fox News, which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal, regardless of the party they are in, including this one.</p></div><p>Right, Fox News just <a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026" title="mediamatters.org">lies</a> [mediamatters.org] about what party the scandal-ridden politicians belong to.
<br> <br>
Seriously, after they repeatedly represented scandal-ridden Republicans as Democrats, and misrepresented footage from previous events as being from more recent ones (tea parties, Palin book signings) to make crowds look larger than they actually were, I don't know how anyone can hold up Fox News as a paragon of journalistic integrity anymore.  And please don't trot out the old tired argument that "everyone else is just as bad or worse".  The fact is Fox News routinely does this sort of thing, and acting like they're in any way "fair and balanced" is just absurd.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interestingly , TFA is from Fox News , which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal , regardless of the party they are in , including this one.Right , Fox News just lies [ mediamatters.org ] about what party the scandal-ridden politicians belong to .
Seriously , after they repeatedly represented scandal-ridden Republicans as Democrats , and misrepresented footage from previous events as being from more recent ones ( tea parties , Palin book signings ) to make crowds look larger than they actually were , I do n't know how anyone can hold up Fox News as a paragon of journalistic integrity anymore .
And please do n't trot out the old tired argument that " everyone else is just as bad or worse " .
The fact is Fox News routinely does this sort of thing , and acting like they 're in any way " fair and balanced " is just absurd .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interestingly, TFA is from Fox News, which pretty much NEVER fails to note the party of a political official in a scandal, regardless of the party they are in, including this one.Right, Fox News just lies [mediamatters.org] about what party the scandal-ridden politicians belong to.
Seriously, after they repeatedly represented scandal-ridden Republicans as Democrats, and misrepresented footage from previous events as being from more recent ones (tea parties, Palin book signings) to make crowds look larger than they actually were, I don't know how anyone can hold up Fox News as a paragon of journalistic integrity anymore.
And please don't trot out the old tired argument that "everyone else is just as bad or worse".
The fact is Fox News routinely does this sort of thing, and acting like they're in any way "fair and balanced" is just absurd.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526686</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The linked article is by Fox News, the media arm of the Republican party. That alone should make you question every word of the article.</p></div><p>I'm a republican, and although I enjoy watching Fox <i>News</i>... One should always take such television stations with a critical view.</p><p>At least they can't get as crazy as talk radio. Now that's a source that you need to be 100\% skeptical of.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The linked article is by Fox News , the media arm of the Republican party .
That alone should make you question every word of the article.I 'm a republican , and although I enjoy watching Fox News... One should always take such television stations with a critical view.At least they ca n't get as crazy as talk radio .
Now that 's a source that you need to be 100 \ % skeptical of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The linked article is by Fox News, the media arm of the Republican party.
That alone should make you question every word of the article.I'm a republican, and although I enjoy watching Fox News... One should always take such television stations with a critical view.At least they can't get as crazy as talk radio.
Now that's a source that you need to be 100\% skeptical of.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528920</id>
	<title>Re:Aren't all voters constituents in a sense?</title>
	<author>Mongoose Disciple</author>
	<datestamp>1261476180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I mean, why shouldn't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people?</i></p><p>Sure; but if you talk about "your congressman" (singular) that clearly refers to the one congressman you get to vote for, and not one of the other 500some.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , why should n't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people ? Sure ; but if you talk about " your congressman " ( singular ) that clearly refers to the one congressman you get to vote for , and not one of the other 500some .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, why shouldn't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people?Sure; but if you talk about "your congressman" (singular) that clearly refers to the one congressman you get to vote for, and not one of the other 500some.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530930</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>evil\_aar0n</author>
	<datestamp>1261485600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; party affiliation is irrelevant; the conduct of a particular congress critter is what is important</p><p>If the particular congress critter could exhibit an ability to think and vote for himself, or his constituents, rather than his party, I might agree with you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; party affiliation is irrelevant ; the conduct of a particular congress critter is what is importantIf the particular congress critter could exhibit an ability to think and vote for himself , or his constituents , rather than his party , I might agree with you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; party affiliation is irrelevant; the conduct of a particular congress critter is what is importantIf the particular congress critter could exhibit an ability to think and vote for himself, or his constituents, rather than his party, I might agree with you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30535646</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259772240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's a natural mistake based on the bad reputation Democrats have earned.<br>Democrats = corruption and scandal (especially sex scandals).<br>And they are the only ones ever involved in vote scandals.<br>I've never heard of dead Republicans voting, have you?<br><br>When anybody hears about a political scandal, their first thought is "DEMOCRAT".<br>Accept it Dems, you made your bed; now lie in it.<br><br>Want a better reputation? Change your ways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a natural mistake based on the bad reputation Democrats have earned.Democrats = corruption and scandal ( especially sex scandals ) .And they are the only ones ever involved in vote scandals.I 've never heard of dead Republicans voting , have you ? When anybody hears about a political scandal , their first thought is " DEMOCRAT " .Accept it Dems , you made your bed ; now lie in it.Want a better reputation ?
Change your ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a natural mistake based on the bad reputation Democrats have earned.Democrats = corruption and scandal (especially sex scandals).And they are the only ones ever involved in vote scandals.I've never heard of dead Republicans voting, have you?When anybody hears about a political scandal, their first thought is "DEMOCRAT".Accept it Dems, you made your bed; now lie in it.Want a better reputation?
Change your ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527048</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530258</id>
	<title>What I want to know</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261481940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who in their right mind voted for this childish, spoiled brat? The man is petty, a big crybaby, a flake, a moron, and doesn't deserve to be in a leadership position.<br><br>If the fools who voted him in aren't embarrassed now, then they have no shame. Is this the best their district has to offer? They need to retire him next November and try to convince the rest of us that they suffered from temporary insanity.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who in their right mind voted for this childish , spoiled brat ?
The man is petty , a big crybaby , a flake , a moron , and does n't deserve to be in a leadership position.If the fools who voted him in are n't embarrassed now , then they have no shame .
Is this the best their district has to offer ?
They need to retire him next November and try to convince the rest of us that they suffered from temporary insanity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who in their right mind voted for this childish, spoiled brat?
The man is petty, a big crybaby, a flake, a moron, and doesn't deserve to be in a leadership position.If the fools who voted him in aren't embarrassed now, then they have no shame.
Is this the best their district has to offer?
They need to retire him next November and try to convince the rest of us that they suffered from temporary insanity.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527460</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>dogmatixpsych</author>
	<datestamp>1261513980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which news source would you prefer then? Just because you do not like Fox News does not mean that they do not report legitimate news. Sure, the article was a bit sensationalist but all news services are about sensationalism and all are biased. We just don't like when news services are biased differently than we are.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which news source would you prefer then ?
Just because you do not like Fox News does not mean that they do not report legitimate news .
Sure , the article was a bit sensationalist but all news services are about sensationalism and all are biased .
We just do n't like when news services are biased differently than we are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which news source would you prefer then?
Just because you do not like Fox News does not mean that they do not report legitimate news.
Sure, the article was a bit sensationalist but all news services are about sensationalism and all are biased.
We just don't like when news services are biased differently than we are.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528970</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>MaWeiTao</author>
	<datestamp>1261476360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, because Media Matters is a bastion of impartiality who never take anything out of context and never blow anything out or proportion.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , because Media Matters is a bastion of impartiality who never take anything out of context and never blow anything out or proportion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, because Media Matters is a bastion of impartiality who never take anything out of context and never blow anything out or proportion.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526672</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30540980</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>sabt-pestnu</author>
	<datestamp>1259764260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>and 2 in the Executive Branch.</p></div><p>Only counting elected positions, are you?  As I recall, there are plenty of other executive branch positions, and white house aid positions (which are probably not technically executive branch) that we hear from on a regular basis.  Secretary of XXX, for instance, or Justice YYY.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and 2 in the Executive Branch.Only counting elected positions , are you ?
As I recall , there are plenty of other executive branch positions , and white house aid positions ( which are probably not technically executive branch ) that we hear from on a regular basis .
Secretary of XXX , for instance , or Justice YYY .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and 2 in the Executive Branch.Only counting elected positions, are you?
As I recall, there are plenty of other executive branch positions, and white house aid positions (which are probably not technically executive branch) that we hear from on a regular basis.
Secretary of XXX, for instance, or Justice YYY.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</id>
	<title>The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>wiredog</author>
	<datestamp>1261510320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is lying, in a political context, a crime?  If the Vice President lies about wmd in Iraq, is that a crime?  If Monsanto lies about their political contributions, is that a crime?  If a blogger lies about her relationship with a Congressman, is that crime?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is lying , in a political context , a crime ?
If the Vice President lies about wmd in Iraq , is that a crime ?
If Monsanto lies about their political contributions , is that a crime ?
If a blogger lies about her relationship with a Congressman , is that crime ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is lying, in a political context, a crime?
If the Vice President lies about wmd in Iraq, is that a crime?
If Monsanto lies about their political contributions, is that a crime?
If a blogger lies about her relationship with a Congressman, is that crime?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529062</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1261476600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"(and IMHO breaking campaign promises is clearly lying) "</p><p>That is a common myopic view that hurts politics.</p><p>You can have a campaign promise, do everything you can to make it happen and still be thwarted by other politicians, and ultimately, the people.</p><p>Pay attention to the process when determining if a campaign promise was a lie, or was simply thwarted.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ( and IMHO breaking campaign promises is clearly lying ) " That is a common myopic view that hurts politics.You can have a campaign promise , do everything you can to make it happen and still be thwarted by other politicians , and ultimately , the people.Pay attention to the process when determining if a campaign promise was a lie , or was simply thwarted .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"(and IMHO breaking campaign promises is clearly lying) "That is a common myopic view that hurts politics.You can have a campaign promise, do everything you can to make it happen and still be thwarted by other politicians, and ultimately, the people.Pay attention to the process when determining if a campaign promise was a lie, or was simply thwarted.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140</id>
	<title>This seems silly on the surface</title>
	<author>UnknowingFool</author>
	<datestamp>1261512900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using "my" in the name of her website because she really isn't his constituent.  Is this all there is to this story?  Bear in mind, the only source I've found is Fox News which isn't exactly balanced reporting (if any of them are).  From the story: "In a four-page letter sent to Holder, Grayson accuses Langley of lying to federal elections and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years."  So what I can tell Langley had been questioned by some sort of official.  Grayson says she lied.  So her crime might be she lied to some officials about where she lived which isn't a high crime but is a crime.</p><p>Here's what I think went down:  Grayson gets attacked on her site.  He investigates the site to know whether it is by a PAC or an independent blogger.  If it's a PAC there are various disclosures that must be done.  Officials question Langley.  Grayson thinks she lied about her constituency at least (and maybe other things like her independence).  So he asks for legal action.  Fox is spinning it to be more sensational than it is for ratings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using " my " in the name of her website because she really is n't his constituent .
Is this all there is to this story ?
Bear in mind , the only source I 've found is Fox News which is n't exactly balanced reporting ( if any of them are ) .
From the story : " In a four-page letter sent to Holder , Grayson accuses Langley of lying to federal elections and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years .
" So what I can tell Langley had been questioned by some sort of official .
Grayson says she lied .
So her crime might be she lied to some officials about where she lived which is n't a high crime but is a crime.Here 's what I think went down : Grayson gets attacked on her site .
He investigates the site to know whether it is by a PAC or an independent blogger .
If it 's a PAC there are various disclosures that must be done .
Officials question Langley .
Grayson thinks she lied about her constituency at least ( and maybe other things like her independence ) .
So he asks for legal action .
Fox is spinning it to be more sensational than it is for ratings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using "my" in the name of her website because she really isn't his constituent.
Is this all there is to this story?
Bear in mind, the only source I've found is Fox News which isn't exactly balanced reporting (if any of them are).
From the story: "In a four-page letter sent to Holder, Grayson accuses Langley of lying to federal elections and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years.
"  So what I can tell Langley had been questioned by some sort of official.
Grayson says she lied.
So her crime might be she lied to some officials about where she lived which isn't a high crime but is a crime.Here's what I think went down:  Grayson gets attacked on her site.
He investigates the site to know whether it is by a PAC or an independent blogger.
If it's a PAC there are various disclosures that must be done.
Officials question Langley.
Grayson thinks she lied about her constituency at least (and maybe other things like her independence).
So he asks for legal action.
Fox is spinning it to be more sensational than it is for ratings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530154</id>
	<title>Faux News</title>
	<author>Lulu of the Lotus-Ea</author>
	<datestamp>1261481460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Notice that the story, complete with the completely false, yellow journalism, headline, is only being run by Fox News.  I saw the story on Google News earlier, and wanted to read the actual facts.  However, so far no reputable news organization has bothered to report it.  Something to keep in mind.</p><p>What seems to be the actual story is that the Congressman sent a rather routine notice to the FEC about a likely violation of PAC status and election law.  All the "trying to send to prison" bit is just a deceptive way of saying that, well yes, laws do have legal force (including ultimately penalties).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Notice that the story , complete with the completely false , yellow journalism , headline , is only being run by Fox News .
I saw the story on Google News earlier , and wanted to read the actual facts .
However , so far no reputable news organization has bothered to report it .
Something to keep in mind.What seems to be the actual story is that the Congressman sent a rather routine notice to the FEC about a likely violation of PAC status and election law .
All the " trying to send to prison " bit is just a deceptive way of saying that , well yes , laws do have legal force ( including ultimately penalties ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Notice that the story, complete with the completely false, yellow journalism, headline, is only being run by Fox News.
I saw the story on Google News earlier, and wanted to read the actual facts.
However, so far no reputable news organization has bothered to report it.
Something to keep in mind.What seems to be the actual story is that the Congressman sent a rather routine notice to the FEC about a likely violation of PAC status and election law.
All the "trying to send to prison" bit is just a deceptive way of saying that, well yes, laws do have legal force (including ultimately penalties).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526832</id>
	<title>Re:What law?</title>
	<author>oh\_my\_080980980</author>
	<datestamp>1261511760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>

<a href="http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html#more" title="wdbo.com" rel="nofollow">http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html#more</a> [wdbo.com]
<br> <br>
Kind of helps to read, doesn't it.
<br> <br>
But I guess if you want to swallow whole, "Florida Congressman Wants Blogging Critic Fined, Jailed," as the truth, especially the "blogger critic" part, as opposed to "Former Republican Party Official using Web Site to Raise Funds to Unseat Representative," then you must be a Fox News viewer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html # more [ wdbo.com ] Kind of helps to read , does n't it .
But I guess if you want to swallow whole , " Florida Congressman Wants Blogging Critic Fined , Jailed , " as the truth , especially the " blogger critic " part , as opposed to " Former Republican Party Official using Web Site to Raise Funds to Unseat Representative , " then you must be a Fox News viewer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html#more [wdbo.com]
 
Kind of helps to read, doesn't it.
But I guess if you want to swallow whole, "Florida Congressman Wants Blogging Critic Fined, Jailed," as the truth, especially the "blogger critic" part, as opposed to "Former Republican Party Official using Web Site to Raise Funds to Unseat Representative," then you must be a Fox News viewer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526510</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526904</id>
	<title>Re:MySpace?</title>
	<author>oh\_my\_080980980</author>
	<datestamp>1261512060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey Jackass.  Read the Complaint.
<br> <br>
<a href="http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html#more" title="wdbo.com" rel="nofollow">http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html#more</a> [wdbo.com]
<br> <br>
She was claiming to be his constituent, when in fact she was not.  She was doing this while fund raising.
<br> <br>
That's illegal.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey Jackass .
Read the Complaint .
http : //wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html # more [ wdbo.com ] She was claiming to be his constituent , when in fact she was not .
She was doing this while fund raising .
That 's illegal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey Jackass.
Read the Complaint.
http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/12/grayson-files-complaint-agains.html#more [wdbo.com]
 
She was claiming to be his constituent, when in fact she was not.
She was doing this while fund raising.
That's illegal.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531180</id>
	<title>Simple</title>
	<author>BCW2</author>
	<datestamp>1261487340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's called freedom of speech and Grayson is a fool. He is just showing one of the main problems with Washington this year. The Dems can't accept any criticism of any kind. They try to ridicule it (Palin, Tea Parties) or counter attack with everything they have (Fox News). The most thin skinned bunch that has been there in my 53 years of life. If they weren't trying to destroy the country it would be funny.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's called freedom of speech and Grayson is a fool .
He is just showing one of the main problems with Washington this year .
The Dems ca n't accept any criticism of any kind .
They try to ridicule it ( Palin , Tea Parties ) or counter attack with everything they have ( Fox News ) .
The most thin skinned bunch that has been there in my 53 years of life .
If they were n't trying to destroy the country it would be funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's called freedom of speech and Grayson is a fool.
He is just showing one of the main problems with Washington this year.
The Dems can't accept any criticism of any kind.
They try to ridicule it (Palin, Tea Parties) or counter attack with everything they have (Fox News).
The most thin skinned bunch that has been there in my 53 years of life.
If they weren't trying to destroy the country it would be funny.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526326</id>
	<title>Her Constituent Status Is Only Part of It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am not a lawyer.  From <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/GraysonComplaint.pdf" title="foxnews.com">the letter</a> [foxnews.com] the complaint seems to be divided into two parts (note that "the Committee" refers directly to MyCongressmanIsNuts.com):<p><div class="quote"><p>As explained below, Ms. Langley and the Committee falsely
represented to the Federal Election Commission that the Committee
"supports or opposes more than one candidate." In fact, however, the
committee name corresponds to a website that attacks me and only me,
while soliciting contributions to be used against only me. Moreover, Ms.
Langley has falsely depicted herself as a constituent, in order to further this
scheme.</p></div><p>Although you may claim it's just another stupid technicality that Florida Rep. Alan Grayson clings to in order to shut down a website that is probably too painfully close to the truth for his comfort, there is another complaint other than the use of the word 'my.'  Now, if you visit the <a href="http://www.mycongressmanisnuts.com/about.html" title="mycongressmanisnuts.com">about us page</a> [mycongressmanisnuts.com] on the committee in question's site you can find:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Central Floridians formed My Congressman Is Nuts <b>PAC</b> as a response to the outrage and embarrassment within Central Florida over <b>Alan Grayson's</b> liberal positions and childish approach in Washington, D.C. We could no longer sit by and accept his inappropriate behavior and leftist big government agenda. He does not represent the values of Central Florida.</p></div><p>Emphasis mine.  Now a key part to the argument is that since it is a PAC with <a href="http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers\_pac.shtml" title="fec.gov">pac registration</a> [fec.gov], it receives taxation status benefits from the government making it subject to the law of <a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1001.html" title="cornell.edu">United States Code Title 18 Section 1001</a> [cornell.edu].  <br> <br>

I mean, he <i>might</i> have a case here if that US code applies to PACs.  I'm not sure.  Were I in his shoes, I would have instead taken the angle of attack related to the title line of the site which is "Alan Grayson is Nuts" and proven that I am not legally insane.  Actually, I wouldn't have done anything.  As Barbara Streisand might have pointed out that before this news I had never heard of nor visited My Congressman Is Nuts but now I have scanned the entire site out of curiosity.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not a lawyer .
From the letter [ foxnews.com ] the complaint seems to be divided into two parts ( note that " the Committee " refers directly to MyCongressmanIsNuts.com ) : As explained below , Ms. Langley and the Committee falsely represented to the Federal Election Commission that the Committee " supports or opposes more than one candidate .
" In fact , however , the committee name corresponds to a website that attacks me and only me , while soliciting contributions to be used against only me .
Moreover , Ms . Langley has falsely depicted herself as a constituent , in order to further this scheme.Although you may claim it 's just another stupid technicality that Florida Rep. Alan Grayson clings to in order to shut down a website that is probably too painfully close to the truth for his comfort , there is another complaint other than the use of the word 'my .
' Now , if you visit the about us page [ mycongressmanisnuts.com ] on the committee in question 's site you can find : Central Floridians formed My Congressman Is Nuts PAC as a response to the outrage and embarrassment within Central Florida over Alan Grayson 's liberal positions and childish approach in Washington , D.C. We could no longer sit by and accept his inappropriate behavior and leftist big government agenda .
He does not represent the values of Central Florida.Emphasis mine .
Now a key part to the argument is that since it is a PAC with pac registration [ fec.gov ] , it receives taxation status benefits from the government making it subject to the law of United States Code Title 18 Section 1001 [ cornell.edu ] .
I mean , he might have a case here if that US code applies to PACs .
I 'm not sure .
Were I in his shoes , I would have instead taken the angle of attack related to the title line of the site which is " Alan Grayson is Nuts " and proven that I am not legally insane .
Actually , I would n't have done anything .
As Barbara Streisand might have pointed out that before this news I had never heard of nor visited My Congressman Is Nuts but now I have scanned the entire site out of curiosity .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not a lawyer.
From the letter [foxnews.com] the complaint seems to be divided into two parts (note that "the Committee" refers directly to MyCongressmanIsNuts.com):As explained below, Ms. Langley and the Committee falsely
represented to the Federal Election Commission that the Committee
"supports or opposes more than one candidate.
" In fact, however, the
committee name corresponds to a website that attacks me and only me,
while soliciting contributions to be used against only me.
Moreover, Ms.
Langley has falsely depicted herself as a constituent, in order to further this
scheme.Although you may claim it's just another stupid technicality that Florida Rep. Alan Grayson clings to in order to shut down a website that is probably too painfully close to the truth for his comfort, there is another complaint other than the use of the word 'my.
'  Now, if you visit the about us page [mycongressmanisnuts.com] on the committee in question's site you can find:Central Floridians formed My Congressman Is Nuts PAC as a response to the outrage and embarrassment within Central Florida over Alan Grayson's liberal positions and childish approach in Washington, D.C. We could no longer sit by and accept his inappropriate behavior and leftist big government agenda.
He does not represent the values of Central Florida.Emphasis mine.
Now a key part to the argument is that since it is a PAC with pac registration [fec.gov], it receives taxation status benefits from the government making it subject to the law of United States Code Title 18 Section 1001 [cornell.edu].
I mean, he might have a case here if that US code applies to PACs.
I'm not sure.
Were I in his shoes, I would have instead taken the angle of attack related to the title line of the site which is "Alan Grayson is Nuts" and proven that I am not legally insane.
Actually, I wouldn't have done anything.
As Barbara Streisand might have pointed out that before this news I had never heard of nor visited My Congressman Is Nuts but now I have scanned the entire site out of curiosity.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527660</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1261514580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is lying, in a political context, a crime? If the Vice President lies about wmd in Iraq, is that a crime? If Monsanto lies about their political contributions, is that a crime? If a blogger lies about her relationship with a Congressman, is that crime?</p></div><p>Lying, is not a crime.  Lying, with the intent to hurt someone is slander and that is a crime. You then have to prove that 1) the person lied, and 2) the person lied with the intent to hurt.<br> <br>

With respect to WMD and Iraq - it wasn't considered a lie, it was considered of being mistaken - and there is a world of difference.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is lying , in a political context , a crime ?
If the Vice President lies about wmd in Iraq , is that a crime ?
If Monsanto lies about their political contributions , is that a crime ?
If a blogger lies about her relationship with a Congressman , is that crime ? Lying , is not a crime .
Lying , with the intent to hurt someone is slander and that is a crime .
You then have to prove that 1 ) the person lied , and 2 ) the person lied with the intent to hurt .
With respect to WMD and Iraq - it was n't considered a lie , it was considered of being mistaken - and there is a world of difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is lying, in a political context, a crime?
If the Vice President lies about wmd in Iraq, is that a crime?
If Monsanto lies about their political contributions, is that a crime?
If a blogger lies about her relationship with a Congressman, is that crime?Lying, is not a crime.
Lying, with the intent to hurt someone is slander and that is a crime.
You then have to prove that 1) the person lied, and 2) the person lied with the intent to hurt.
With respect to WMD and Iraq - it wasn't considered a lie, it was considered of being mistaken - and there is a world of difference.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526822</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>berashith</author>
	<datestamp>1261511700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When are you liberals going to learn<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the republican party is the political wing of Fox News.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When are you liberals going to learn ... the republican party is the political wing of Fox News .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When are you liberals going to learn ... the republican party is the political wing of Fox News.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530502</id>
	<title>blah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261483020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really do respect Rep. Grayson however I do believe he is wrong on this one.  He should back down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really do respect Rep. Grayson however I do believe he is wrong on this one .
He should back down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really do respect Rep. Grayson however I do believe he is wrong on this one.
He should back down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529650</id>
	<title>He's my congressman too.</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1261479180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He's a congressman in my country's federal legislative branch of government.  When I'm talking to a worldwide audience like the internet, he's mine too, even though I don't live in his state and can't vote for him.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's a congressman in my country 's federal legislative branch of government .
When I 'm talking to a worldwide audience like the internet , he 's mine too , even though I do n't live in his state and ca n't vote for him .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's a congressman in my country's federal legislative branch of government.
When I'm talking to a worldwide audience like the internet, he's mine too, even though I don't live in his state and can't vote for him.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531138</id>
	<title>Re:This seems silly on the surface</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1261487040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"In a four-page letter sent to Holder, Grayson accuses Langley of lying to federal elections and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years."</p><p>And what in that statement is either unfair or unbalanced?</p><p>You could at least serve up a helping of fact with your irrationality, eh?  If that statement is your basis for calling Fox News unfair and/or unbalanced, you are at least a zip code away from reality.</p><p>Please, you don't need to make stuff up.  Politics, news, the media, and journalism are pretty much fracked up in America.  The plain facts are more than enough to make your point without this apparent disconnect.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" In a four-page letter sent to Holder , Grayson accuses Langley of lying to federal elections and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years .
" And what in that statement is either unfair or unbalanced ? You could at least serve up a helping of fact with your irrationality , eh ?
If that statement is your basis for calling Fox News unfair and/or unbalanced , you are at least a zip code away from reality.Please , you do n't need to make stuff up .
Politics , news , the media , and journalism are pretty much fracked up in America .
The plain facts are more than enough to make your point without this apparent disconnect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"In a four-page letter sent to Holder, Grayson accuses Langley of lying to federal elections and requests that she be fined and imprisoned for five years.
"And what in that statement is either unfair or unbalanced?You could at least serve up a helping of fact with your irrationality, eh?
If that statement is your basis for calling Fox News unfair and/or unbalanced, you are at least a zip code away from reality.Please, you don't need to make stuff up.
Politics, news, the media, and journalism are pretty much fracked up in America.
The plain facts are more than enough to make your point without this apparent disconnect.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526684</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1261511340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As opposed to material that should be read unquestioningly?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As opposed to material that should be read unquestioningly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As opposed to material that should be read unquestioningly?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527548</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>furby076</author>
	<datestamp>1261514340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You got modded a troll, what a shame.  Your statement is correct. Fox News is anything but fair and balanced...well unless you are a republican.  If Fox news says anything nice about a liberal then it's probably that the liberal just resigned office - and even then...<br> <br>

BTW - for the 323,325 commenters - yes democrats have their own media sources - CNN.  CNN went from the really good news start up, to a liberal news group, to the liberal insanity group (and I'm a democrat).  It's gotten to the point that watching CNN makes me want to puke, though in all honesty watching Fox News makes me puke...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You got modded a troll , what a shame .
Your statement is correct .
Fox News is anything but fair and balanced...well unless you are a republican .
If Fox news says anything nice about a liberal then it 's probably that the liberal just resigned office - and even then.. . BTW - for the 323,325 commenters - yes democrats have their own media sources - CNN .
CNN went from the really good news start up , to a liberal news group , to the liberal insanity group ( and I 'm a democrat ) .
It 's gotten to the point that watching CNN makes me want to puke , though in all honesty watching Fox News makes me puke.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You got modded a troll, what a shame.
Your statement is correct.
Fox News is anything but fair and balanced...well unless you are a republican.
If Fox news says anything nice about a liberal then it's probably that the liberal just resigned office - and even then... 

BTW - for the 323,325 commenters - yes democrats have their own media sources - CNN.
CNN went from the really good news start up, to a liberal news group, to the liberal insanity group (and I'm a democrat).
It's gotten to the point that watching CNN makes me want to puke, though in all honesty watching Fox News makes me puke...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>Tangential</author>
	<datestamp>1261512540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we are going to treat lying as a crime (and IMHO breaking campaign promises is clearly lying) then there are going to be a whole lot of people going to jail. I foresee lots of  openings in Washington. I won't name any names, but there would be 435 vacancies in the House of Representatives, 100 in the Senate and 2 in the Executive Branch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we are going to treat lying as a crime ( and IMHO breaking campaign promises is clearly lying ) then there are going to be a whole lot of people going to jail .
I foresee lots of openings in Washington .
I wo n't name any names , but there would be 435 vacancies in the House of Representatives , 100 in the Senate and 2 in the Executive Branch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we are going to treat lying as a crime (and IMHO breaking campaign promises is clearly lying) then there are going to be a whole lot of people going to jail.
I foresee lots of  openings in Washington.
I won't name any names, but there would be 435 vacancies in the House of Representatives, 100 in the Senate and 2 in the Executive Branch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30532738</id>
	<title>You will need our approval when living</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261505460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are fast becoming a country that are losing their rights. It is now that the gov't is free to do whatever they want while "We the People" must seek special permission to live our lives unmolested. It is funny the elite were of the mindset that we have the right to question authority but now they are in charge, you don't dare question their authority. Do as you are told and shut up !</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are fast becoming a country that are losing their rights .
It is now that the gov't is free to do whatever they want while " We the People " must seek special permission to live our lives unmolested .
It is funny the elite were of the mindset that we have the right to question authority but now they are in charge , you do n't dare question their authority .
Do as you are told and shut up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are fast becoming a country that are losing their rights.
It is now that the gov't is free to do whatever they want while "We the People" must seek special permission to live our lives unmolested.
It is funny the elite were of the mindset that we have the right to question authority but now they are in charge, you don't dare question their authority.
Do as you are told and shut up !</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529596</id>
	<title>Re:This seems silly on the surface</title>
	<author>AK Marc</author>
	<datestamp>1261478940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using "my" in the name of her website because she really isn't his constituent. Is this all there is to this story?</i> <br> <br>The "balance" to this is that the blogger is a PAC, didn't fully disclose this where required.  Committed fraud in the PAC filings, and is illegally operating a PAC in direct violation of the election laws, using deceit and lies to steal money from taxpayers (though false non-profit status) and pervert the election process.<br> <br>That may not be all true, but it is more true that him suing her solely for the use of the word "my."</htmltext>
<tokenext>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using " my " in the name of her website because she really is n't his constituent .
Is this all there is to this story ?
The " balance " to this is that the blogger is a PAC , did n't fully disclose this where required .
Committed fraud in the PAC filings , and is illegally operating a PAC in direct violation of the election laws , using deceit and lies to steal money from taxpayers ( though false non-profit status ) and pervert the election process .
That may not be all true , but it is more true that him suing her solely for the use of the word " my .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using "my" in the name of her website because she really isn't his constituent.
Is this all there is to this story?
The "balance" to this is that the blogger is a PAC, didn't fully disclose this where required.
Committed fraud in the PAC filings, and is illegally operating a PAC in direct violation of the election laws, using deceit and lies to steal money from taxpayers (though false non-profit status) and pervert the election process.
That may not be all true, but it is more true that him suing her solely for the use of the word "my.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526460</id>
	<title>Streisand....</title>
	<author>18\_Rabbit</author>
	<datestamp>1261510560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While I generally like Rep. Grayson because he doesn't roll over and take it in the ass from the republicans like most democrats do, in this case he's going to end up streisanding this wingnut blogger.</htmltext>
<tokenext>While I generally like Rep. Grayson because he does n't roll over and take it in the ass from the republicans like most democrats do , in this case he 's going to end up streisanding this wingnut blogger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I generally like Rep. Grayson because he doesn't roll over and take it in the ass from the republicans like most democrats do, in this case he's going to end up streisanding this wingnut blogger.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531890</id>
	<title>OMG! Has Boing-Beoing heard about this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261494240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given they are the self-appointed guardian of blogger rights against governmental abuses, they should be on the warpath.  Wait, you say the blogger is a Republican and the Congressman is an outspoken "liberal"?  Oh sorry, forget I mentioned it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given they are the self-appointed guardian of blogger rights against governmental abuses , they should be on the warpath .
Wait , you say the blogger is a Republican and the Congressman is an outspoken " liberal " ?
Oh sorry , forget I mentioned it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given they are the self-appointed guardian of blogger rights against governmental abuses, they should be on the warpath.
Wait, you say the blogger is a Republican and the Congressman is an outspoken "liberal"?
Oh sorry, forget I mentioned it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529408</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1261478040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Slashdot has a libertarian leaning bias</i></p><p>Not really. Slashdot is a pretty diverse bunch. There are right wing wingnuts, left wing wingnuts, libertarian wingnuts, socialist wingnuts, and moderate folks of all stripes. It's a tech site, people come for the tech but techies come in all colors. DailyCos is set up as a leftist site so of course it will be left-leaning, Fox is owned by a right wing wingnut and his views are of course its views.</p><p>The Libertarians just seem to shout louder; you should have seen all the Ron Paul yard signs here last primary election, if elections were won by yard signs he'd have been the Republican candidate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot has a libertarian leaning biasNot really .
Slashdot is a pretty diverse bunch .
There are right wing wingnuts , left wing wingnuts , libertarian wingnuts , socialist wingnuts , and moderate folks of all stripes .
It 's a tech site , people come for the tech but techies come in all colors .
DailyCos is set up as a leftist site so of course it will be left-leaning , Fox is owned by a right wing wingnut and his views are of course its views.The Libertarians just seem to shout louder ; you should have seen all the Ron Paul yard signs here last primary election , if elections were won by yard signs he 'd have been the Republican candidate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot has a libertarian leaning biasNot really.
Slashdot is a pretty diverse bunch.
There are right wing wingnuts, left wing wingnuts, libertarian wingnuts, socialist wingnuts, and moderate folks of all stripes.
It's a tech site, people come for the tech but techies come in all colors.
DailyCos is set up as a leftist site so of course it will be left-leaning, Fox is owned by a right wing wingnut and his views are of course its views.The Libertarians just seem to shout louder; you should have seen all the Ron Paul yard signs here last primary election, if elections were won by yard signs he'd have been the Republican candidate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526404</id>
	<title>Aren't all voters constituents in a sense?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've always been bothered by the idea that voters who elect representative officials are limited to talking to just those officials on matters that have national scale and scope... in other words, just about everything the federal government does.</p><p>I mean, why shouldn't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people?<br>g=</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always been bothered by the idea that voters who elect representative officials are limited to talking to just those officials on matters that have national scale and scope... in other words , just about everything the federal government does.I mean , why should n't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people ? g =</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've always been bothered by the idea that voters who elect representative officials are limited to talking to just those officials on matters that have national scale and scope... in other words, just about everything the federal government does.I mean, why shouldn't I as a citizen of the state of Abstraction be able to ask the Senator from the state of Facts to vote for a proposal that is in the best interests of the American people?g=</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527304</id>
	<title>Re:MySpace?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261513500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why were you rated offtopic? This post seems right on to me. Hey mods - did you even read the post?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why were you rated offtopic ?
This post seems right on to me .
Hey mods - did you even read the post ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why were you rated offtopic?
This post seems right on to me.
Hey mods - did you even read the post?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526632</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526914</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261512120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's a crime is putting this in the company of lies over political contributions by a major corporation or lies from the VP about wmd in Iraq.</p><p>This is not the same.  This is a blogger who frames their speech in the context of being a constituent of someone who represents the district nearby.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's a crime is putting this in the company of lies over political contributions by a major corporation or lies from the VP about wmd in Iraq.This is not the same .
This is a blogger who frames their speech in the context of being a constituent of someone who represents the district nearby .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's a crime is putting this in the company of lies over political contributions by a major corporation or lies from the VP about wmd in Iraq.This is not the same.
This is a blogger who frames their speech in the context of being a constituent of someone who represents the district nearby.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526440</id>
	<title>This guy is an idiot and an embarassment</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just Google him and look at his moronic attention-seeking antics.  He's a wannabe Trafficant, and there is no story here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just Google him and look at his moronic attention-seeking antics .
He 's a wannabe Trafficant , and there is no story here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just Google him and look at his moronic attention-seeking antics.
He's a wannabe Trafficant, and there is no story here.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</id>
	<title>I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The linked article is by Fox News, the media arm of the Republican party. That alone should make you question every word of the article.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The linked article is by Fox News , the media arm of the Republican party .
That alone should make you question every word of the article .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The linked article is by Fox News, the media arm of the Republican party.
That alone should make you question every word of the article.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526778</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The linked article is by Fox News, the media arm of the Republican party. That alone should make you question every word of the article.</p></div><p>Well vs. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, PBS etc...</p><p>I guess since the ratings speak for themselves, to quote Chris Pine as Kirk "Why don't you get a few more guys and the fight will be fair."</p><p>When has Fox ever falsified anything?  CBS and CNN anyone?!  I would acknowledge that Fox has a large number of Conservative commentators.  That is commentary.<br>Since all you watch is mainstream media, I should cut you some slack, since they don't know the difference either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The linked article is by Fox News , the media arm of the Republican party .
That alone should make you question every word of the article.Well vs. CNN , MSNBC , ABC , CBS , PBS etc...I guess since the ratings speak for themselves , to quote Chris Pine as Kirk " Why do n't you get a few more guys and the fight will be fair .
" When has Fox ever falsified anything ?
CBS and CNN anyone ? !
I would acknowledge that Fox has a large number of Conservative commentators .
That is commentary.Since all you watch is mainstream media , I should cut you some slack , since they do n't know the difference either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The linked article is by Fox News, the media arm of the Republican party.
That alone should make you question every word of the article.Well vs. CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, PBS etc...I guess since the ratings speak for themselves, to quote Chris Pine as Kirk "Why don't you get a few more guys and the fight will be fair.
"When has Fox ever falsified anything?
CBS and CNN anyone?!
I would acknowledge that Fox has a large number of Conservative commentators.
That is commentary.Since all you watch is mainstream media, I should cut you some slack, since they don't know the difference either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527616</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>tibman</author>
	<datestamp>1261514520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That depends on what your definition of "is" is</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That depends on what your definition of " is " is</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That depends on what your definition of "is" is</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526830</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>carrolljim</author>
	<datestamp>1261511760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, Fox News does occassionally omit the partisian labels, and even switches them (<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026" title="mediamatters.org" rel="nofollow">http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026</a> [mediamatters.org] - assumedly this is inadvertant, although folks more suspicious than I tend to infer malacious intent).  That doesn't make the omission here any better, of course.
</p><p>
It's fair to say there has been a severe lack of civility on both sides of the aisle, highlighted mostly on the Republican side, I think (Cheney telling Leahy to Go F\_\_k himself, the rep who shouted "you lie" during the presidential address, etc), although Rep. Grayson clearly enjoys lowering the standards himself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , Fox News does occassionally omit the partisian labels , and even switches them ( http : //mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026 [ mediamatters.org ] - assumedly this is inadvertant , although folks more suspicious than I tend to infer malacious intent ) .
That does n't make the omission here any better , of course .
It 's fair to say there has been a severe lack of civility on both sides of the aisle , highlighted mostly on the Republican side , I think ( Cheney telling Leahy to Go F \ _ \ _k himself , the rep who shouted " you lie " during the presidential address , etc ) , although Rep. Grayson clearly enjoys lowering the standards himself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, Fox News does occassionally omit the partisian labels, and even switches them (http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026 [mediamatters.org] - assumedly this is inadvertant, although folks more suspicious than I tend to infer malacious intent).
That doesn't make the omission here any better, of course.
It's fair to say there has been a severe lack of civility on both sides of the aisle, highlighted mostly on the Republican side, I think (Cheney telling Leahy to Go F\_\_k himself, the rep who shouted "you lie" during the presidential address, etc), although Rep. Grayson clearly enjoys lowering the standards himself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530980</id>
	<title>Threatening to jail constituents?</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1261485900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Threatening to jail constituents for criticizing you? What exactly is the message you are trying to send -- which horrific evil figure of the past and present are you trying to resemble? Are you shooting for Stalin, or are you trying for something a little fresher, like Ahmadinejad?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Threatening to jail constituents for criticizing you ?
What exactly is the message you are trying to send -- which horrific evil figure of the past and present are you trying to resemble ?
Are you shooting for Stalin , or are you trying for something a little fresher , like Ahmadinejad ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Threatening to jail constituents for criticizing you?
What exactly is the message you are trying to send -- which horrific evil figure of the past and present are you trying to resemble?
Are you shooting for Stalin, or are you trying for something a little fresher, like Ahmadinejad?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526534</id>
	<title>PACs have to play by the rules</title>
	<author>Orange Crush</author>
	<datestamp>1261510740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>She can say (just about) whatever she wants as a private citizen--constituent or not, but if she's taking political contributions as a PAC, she needs to play by the already much-too-lose campaign finance laws.</htmltext>
<tokenext>She can say ( just about ) whatever she wants as a private citizen--constituent or not , but if she 's taking political contributions as a PAC , she needs to play by the already much-too-lose campaign finance laws .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>She can say (just about) whatever she wants as a private citizen--constituent or not, but if she's taking political contributions as a PAC, she needs to play by the already much-too-lose campaign finance laws.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528212</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>snowgirl</author>
	<datestamp>1261473180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yay. I'm with you on this one. At the moment Rep Alan Grayson is a champion of truth, justice, etc etc. All the qualities you'd actually LIKE to see in a congressional representative. So I was a bit surprised when I read the headline. Then I clicked the link and realized it went to foxnews.com. Fox News has been trying to paint Rep. Grayson as a nutjob for a LONG time. He gets in the way of their agenda.</p><p>First line FTFA</p><p><div class="quote"><p>My, my, my. Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail -- all over her use of the word "my."</p></div><p>A bit sensionalist don't ya think. I bet halfway through the article it talks about how he wants to kill babies and eat their brains. Well I chuckled, closed the link, and moved on.</p><p>Nothing to see here folks.</p></div><p>Yeah, well, then you read the four page document to Eric Holder, and you find out that she actually organized a PAC with the FEC and is soliciting money to use against him and only him, in violation of the terms under which her PAC was established... so... yeah, not like Fox News would totally gloss over the huge pointy teeth on the rabbit, but rather just point and laugh at Tim saying, "you're crazy!!!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yay .
I 'm with you on this one .
At the moment Rep Alan Grayson is a champion of truth , justice , etc etc .
All the qualities you 'd actually LIKE to see in a congressional representative .
So I was a bit surprised when I read the headline .
Then I clicked the link and realized it went to foxnews.com .
Fox News has been trying to paint Rep. Grayson as a nutjob for a LONG time .
He gets in the way of their agenda.First line FTFAMy , my , my .
Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail -- all over her use of the word " my .
" A bit sensionalist do n't ya think .
I bet halfway through the article it talks about how he wants to kill babies and eat their brains .
Well I chuckled , closed the link , and moved on.Nothing to see here folks.Yeah , well , then you read the four page document to Eric Holder , and you find out that she actually organized a PAC with the FEC and is soliciting money to use against him and only him , in violation of the terms under which her PAC was established... so... yeah , not like Fox News would totally gloss over the huge pointy teeth on the rabbit , but rather just point and laugh at Tim saying , " you 're crazy ! ! !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yay.
I'm with you on this one.
At the moment Rep Alan Grayson is a champion of truth, justice, etc etc.
All the qualities you'd actually LIKE to see in a congressional representative.
So I was a bit surprised when I read the headline.
Then I clicked the link and realized it went to foxnews.com.
Fox News has been trying to paint Rep. Grayson as a nutjob for a LONG time.
He gets in the way of their agenda.First line FTFAMy, my, my.
Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail -- all over her use of the word "my.
"A bit sensionalist don't ya think.
I bet halfway through the article it talks about how he wants to kill babies and eat their brains.
Well I chuckled, closed the link, and moved on.Nothing to see here folks.Yeah, well, then you read the four page document to Eric Holder, and you find out that she actually organized a PAC with the FEC and is soliciting money to use against him and only him, in violation of the terms under which her PAC was established... so... yeah, not like Fox News would totally gloss over the huge pointy teeth on the rabbit, but rather just point and laugh at Tim saying, "you're crazy!!!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529560</id>
	<title>Re:This seems silly on the surface</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1261478760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, you know Fox's motto, "Fairly Unbalanced".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you know Fox 's motto , " Fairly Unbalanced " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you know Fox's motto, "Fairly Unbalanced".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527696</id>
	<title>Fucking stupid republicans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261514700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, wait.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , wait .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, wait.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528018</id>
	<title>Re:This seems silly on the surface</title>
	<author>SwashbucklingCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1261472520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What Grayson did is politically stupid.  However, it is arguable that the person running the web site has violated the law.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What Grayson did is politically stupid .
However , it is arguable that the person running the web site has violated the law .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What Grayson did is politically stupid.
However, it is arguable that the person running the web site has violated the law.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526510</id>
	<title>What law?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261510680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sorry, I must be dumb.  Someone please explain to me, exactly WHAT law is she breaking?  I read the complaint.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , I must be dumb .
Someone please explain to me , exactly WHAT law is she breaking ?
I read the complaint .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, I must be dumb.
Someone please explain to me, exactly WHAT law is she breaking?
I read the complaint.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526960</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261512300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, Fox News apparently forgot Mark Foley was a Republican, and listed him as Mark Foley (D-FL). Same for the Republican governor of South Carolina after his affair.</p><p><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fox-news-identifies-sanfo\_n\_220377.html" title="huffingtonpost.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fox-news-identifies-sanfo\_n\_220377.html</a> [huffingtonpost.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , Fox News apparently forgot Mark Foley was a Republican , and listed him as Mark Foley ( D-FL ) .
Same for the Republican governor of South Carolina after his affair.http : //www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fox-news-identifies-sanfo \ _n \ _220377.html [ huffingtonpost.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, Fox News apparently forgot Mark Foley was a Republican, and listed him as Mark Foley (D-FL).
Same for the Republican governor of South Carolina after his affair.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/24/fox-news-identifies-sanfo\_n\_220377.html [huffingtonpost.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527110</id>
	<title>You wouldn't name it 'YourCongressmanIsNuts.com'</title>
	<author>meerling</author>
	<datestamp>1261512780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>With regards to the name, if someone is ticked at him and searching for or just typing in a dissenting statement hoping to find a site, they will always use 'My' instead of 'Your'.<br>How many people do you know that have gone to a help site and looked for 'my (something) is broken'.<br>(probably a lot, then they call us in a panic, I know, we all know...)<br><br>I haven't even looked into the other allegation, but as ianal, it would probably get too messy for me anyhow.<br><br>Besides, that guy is a total wackjob anyhow. His public statements have already proven that his entire political career, and possible himself, should be shoved into a deep dark rubber room and heavily medicated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>With regards to the name , if someone is ticked at him and searching for or just typing in a dissenting statement hoping to find a site , they will always use 'My ' instead of 'Your'.How many people do you know that have gone to a help site and looked for 'my ( something ) is broken' .
( probably a lot , then they call us in a panic , I know , we all know... ) I have n't even looked into the other allegation , but as ianal , it would probably get too messy for me anyhow.Besides , that guy is a total wackjob anyhow .
His public statements have already proven that his entire political career , and possible himself , should be shoved into a deep dark rubber room and heavily medicated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With regards to the name, if someone is ticked at him and searching for or just typing in a dissenting statement hoping to find a site, they will always use 'My' instead of 'Your'.How many people do you know that have gone to a help site and looked for 'my (something) is broken'.
(probably a lot, then they call us in a panic, I know, we all know...)I haven't even looked into the other allegation, but as ianal, it would probably get too messy for me anyhow.Besides, that guy is a total wackjob anyhow.
His public statements have already proven that his entire political career, and possible himself, should be shoved into a deep dark rubber room and heavily medicated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526704</id>
	<title>Re:Clear Submission Bias</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And when there was the story a little while back about the Republican who raped his daughters and was trying to censor news about it where Slashdot didn't mention his political affiliation, that was a clear example of Evil Liberal Bias too, right?</p><p>If this is what you mean when you're talking about "liberal bias" then it's no wonder everyone looks at you like you're a paranoid lunatic.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And when there was the story a little while back about the Republican who raped his daughters and was trying to censor news about it where Slashdot did n't mention his political affiliation , that was a clear example of Evil Liberal Bias too , right ? If this is what you mean when you 're talking about " liberal bias " then it 's no wonder everyone looks at you like you 're a paranoid lunatic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And when there was the story a little while back about the Republican who raped his daughters and was trying to censor news about it where Slashdot didn't mention his political affiliation, that was a clear example of Evil Liberal Bias too, right?If this is what you mean when you're talking about "liberal bias" then it's no wonder everyone looks at you like you're a paranoid lunatic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526740</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>the\_macman</author>
	<datestamp>1261511460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yay. I'm with you on this one. At the moment Rep Alan Grayson is a champion of truth, justice, etc etc. All the qualities you'd actually LIKE to see in a congressional representative. So I was a bit surprised when I read the headline. Then I clicked the link and realized it went to foxnews.com. Fox News has been trying to paint Rep. Grayson as a nutjob for a LONG time. He gets in the way of their agenda.</p><p>First line FTFA</p><p><div class="quote"><p>My, my, my. Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail -- all over her use of the word "my."</p></div><p>A bit sensionalist don't ya think. I bet halfway through the article it talks about how he wants to kill babies and eat their brains. Well I chuckled, closed the link, and moved on.</p><p>Nothing to see here folks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yay .
I 'm with you on this one .
At the moment Rep Alan Grayson is a champion of truth , justice , etc etc .
All the qualities you 'd actually LIKE to see in a congressional representative .
So I was a bit surprised when I read the headline .
Then I clicked the link and realized it went to foxnews.com .
Fox News has been trying to paint Rep. Grayson as a nutjob for a LONG time .
He gets in the way of their agenda.First line FTFAMy , my , my .
Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail -- all over her use of the word " my .
" A bit sensionalist do n't ya think .
I bet halfway through the article it talks about how he wants to kill babies and eat their brains .
Well I chuckled , closed the link , and moved on.Nothing to see here folks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yay.
I'm with you on this one.
At the moment Rep Alan Grayson is a champion of truth, justice, etc etc.
All the qualities you'd actually LIKE to see in a congressional representative.
So I was a bit surprised when I read the headline.
Then I clicked the link and realized it went to foxnews.com.
Fox News has been trying to paint Rep. Grayson as a nutjob for a LONG time.
He gets in the way of their agenda.First line FTFAMy, my, my.
Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail -- all over her use of the word "my.
"A bit sensionalist don't ya think.
I bet halfway through the article it talks about how he wants to kill babies and eat their brains.
Well I chuckled, closed the link, and moved on.Nothing to see here folks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529234</id>
	<title>What a tool</title>
	<author>OrangeMonkey11</author>
	<datestamp>1261477260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Alan Grayson deserve to be bound gag and thrown in a river for this stupid a$$ stunt.  Just another b1tcha$$ politician acting like a three years old trying throw someone in jail because he doesn't like a little criticism.</p><p>Like the old saying goes "if you don't like the heat get the f*ck out of the kitchen"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Alan Grayson deserve to be bound gag and thrown in a river for this stupid a $ $ stunt .
Just another b1tcha $ $ politician acting like a three years old trying throw someone in jail because he does n't like a little criticism.Like the old saying goes " if you do n't like the heat get the f * ck out of the kitchen "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alan Grayson deserve to be bound gag and thrown in a river for this stupid a$$ stunt.
Just another b1tcha$$ politician acting like a three years old trying throw someone in jail because he doesn't like a little criticism.Like the old saying goes "if you don't like the heat get the f*ck out of the kitchen"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530708</id>
	<title>Dear Rep. Alan Grayson:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261484160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just want to say one thing: Most illiterate lie-virtuosi think, "credo, quia absurdum" when they hear Rep. Alan Grayson say that representative government is an outmoded system that should be replaced by a system of overt animalism. It may help if I begin my discussion by relating an innocuous story in order to illustrate my point: A few days ago I was arguing with a particularly revolting four-flusher who was insisting that the majority of pugnacious, lubricious rapscallions are heroes, if not saints. I tried to convince this stingy rube that some people say that that isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Grayson is secretly scheming to generate an epidemic of corruption and social unrest. And I must agree; one needs much more evidence than that. But the evidence is there, for anyone who isn't afraid to look at it. Just look at the way that he likes to concoct labels for people, objects, and behaviors in order to manipulate the public's opinion of them. Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however. If you drag it into the open, Grayson and his assistants will run for cover like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night. That's why we must weaken the critical links in Grayson's nexus of brazen anti-intellectualism.</p><p>Grayson is completely versipellous. When he's among plebeians, Grayson warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against sesquipedalianism. But when Grayson is safely surrounded by his peons, he instructs them to promote violence in all its forms&mdash;physical, sexual, psychological, economical, and social. That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that you may have noticed that Grayson is as pusillanimous as the sky is blue. But you don't know the half of it. For starters, if I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population, I would convince them that Grayson can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft. In fact, that's exactly what Grayson does as part of his quest to do exactly the things he accuses reckless bozos of doing.</p><p>If Grayson hadn't been challenging all I stand for, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading. Why, I might have taken the day off altogether. Or maybe I would have been out commenting on Grayson's methods of interpretation. In any case, what Grayson is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing. It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly irrational activity. If I seem a bit sordid, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with him on his own level.</p><p>Regardless of whether we consider Grayson a lunatic, an evil aggressor, or whatever, if he bites me I will bite back. Now, I don't want to overwork the story about how he plans to destroy the heart and fabric of our nation, so let's just say that he has been trying for some time to convince people that he should worsen an already unstable situation because "it's the right thing to do". Don't believe his hype! Grayson has just been offering that line as a means to place beastly vagrants at the head of a nationwide kakistocracy.</p><p>Whether the downfall of our culture can be arrested by a violent rejection of Grayson's smarmy crotchets, I am unable to decide; that would require forces with whose existence I am unacquainted. Nevertheless, you may want to consider that it would be great if all of us could kick butt and take names. In the end, however, money talks and you-know-what walks. Perhaps that truism also explains why this makes me fearful that I might someday find myself in the crosshairs of Grayson's untrustworthy newsgroup postings. (To be honest, though, it wouldn't be the first time.) Grayson is frightened that we might take a strong position on his commentaries, which, after all, label everyone he doesn't like as a racist, sexist, fascist, communist, or some equally terrible "-ist". That's why he's trying so hard</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just want to say one thing : Most illiterate lie-virtuosi think , " credo , quia absurdum " when they hear Rep. Alan Grayson say that representative government is an outmoded system that should be replaced by a system of overt animalism .
It may help if I begin my discussion by relating an innocuous story in order to illustrate my point : A few days ago I was arguing with a particularly revolting four-flusher who was insisting that the majority of pugnacious , lubricious rapscallions are heroes , if not saints .
I tried to convince this stingy rube that some people say that that is n't sufficient evidence to prove that Grayson is secretly scheming to generate an epidemic of corruption and social unrest .
And I must agree ; one needs much more evidence than that .
But the evidence is there , for anyone who is n't afraid to look at it .
Just look at the way that he likes to concoct labels for people , objects , and behaviors in order to manipulate the public 's opinion of them .
Such activity can flourish only in the dark , however .
If you drag it into the open , Grayson and his assistants will run for cover like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night .
That 's why we must weaken the critical links in Grayson 's nexus of brazen anti-intellectualism.Grayson is completely versipellous .
When he 's among plebeians , Grayson warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against sesquipedalianism .
But when Grayson is safely surrounded by his peons , he instructs them to promote violence in all its forms    physical , sexual , psychological , economical , and social .
That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that you may have noticed that Grayson is as pusillanimous as the sky is blue .
But you do n't know the half of it .
For starters , if I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population , I would convince them that Grayson can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence , deception , oppression , exploitation , graft , and theft .
In fact , that 's exactly what Grayson does as part of his quest to do exactly the things he accuses reckless bozos of doing.If Grayson had n't been challenging all I stand for , it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading .
Why , I might have taken the day off altogether .
Or maybe I would have been out commenting on Grayson 's methods of interpretation .
In any case , what Grayson is doing is not an innocent , recreational sort of thing .
It is a criminal activity , it is an immoral activity , it is a socially destructive activity , and it is a profoundly irrational activity .
If I seem a bit sordid , it 's only because I 'm trying to communicate with him on his own level.Regardless of whether we consider Grayson a lunatic , an evil aggressor , or whatever , if he bites me I will bite back .
Now , I do n't want to overwork the story about how he plans to destroy the heart and fabric of our nation , so let 's just say that he has been trying for some time to convince people that he should worsen an already unstable situation because " it 's the right thing to do " .
Do n't believe his hype !
Grayson has just been offering that line as a means to place beastly vagrants at the head of a nationwide kakistocracy.Whether the downfall of our culture can be arrested by a violent rejection of Grayson 's smarmy crotchets , I am unable to decide ; that would require forces with whose existence I am unacquainted .
Nevertheless , you may want to consider that it would be great if all of us could kick butt and take names .
In the end , however , money talks and you-know-what walks .
Perhaps that truism also explains why this makes me fearful that I might someday find myself in the crosshairs of Grayson 's untrustworthy newsgroup postings .
( To be honest , though , it would n't be the first time .
) Grayson is frightened that we might take a strong position on his commentaries , which , after all , label everyone he does n't like as a racist , sexist , fascist , communist , or some equally terrible " -ist " .
That 's why he 's trying so hard</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just want to say one thing: Most illiterate lie-virtuosi think, "credo, quia absurdum" when they hear Rep. Alan Grayson say that representative government is an outmoded system that should be replaced by a system of overt animalism.
It may help if I begin my discussion by relating an innocuous story in order to illustrate my point: A few days ago I was arguing with a particularly revolting four-flusher who was insisting that the majority of pugnacious, lubricious rapscallions are heroes, if not saints.
I tried to convince this stingy rube that some people say that that isn't sufficient evidence to prove that Grayson is secretly scheming to generate an epidemic of corruption and social unrest.
And I must agree; one needs much more evidence than that.
But the evidence is there, for anyone who isn't afraid to look at it.
Just look at the way that he likes to concoct labels for people, objects, and behaviors in order to manipulate the public's opinion of them.
Such activity can flourish only in the dark, however.
If you drag it into the open, Grayson and his assistants will run for cover like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the light is turned on suddenly during the night.
That's why we must weaken the critical links in Grayson's nexus of brazen anti-intellectualism.Grayson is completely versipellous.
When he's among plebeians, Grayson warms the cockles of their hearts by remonstrating against sesquipedalianism.
But when Grayson is safely surrounded by his peons, he instructs them to promote violence in all its forms—physical, sexual, psychological, economical, and social.
That type of cunning two-sidedness tells us that you may have noticed that Grayson is as pusillanimous as the sky is blue.
But you don't know the half of it.
For starters, if I wanted to brainwash and manipulate a large segment of the population, I would convince them that Grayson can bring about peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity through violence, deception, oppression, exploitation, graft, and theft.
In fact, that's exactly what Grayson does as part of his quest to do exactly the things he accuses reckless bozos of doing.If Grayson hadn't been challenging all I stand for, it simply would not have occurred to me to write the letter you now are reading.
Why, I might have taken the day off altogether.
Or maybe I would have been out commenting on Grayson's methods of interpretation.
In any case, what Grayson is doing is not an innocent, recreational sort of thing.
It is a criminal activity, it is an immoral activity, it is a socially destructive activity, and it is a profoundly irrational activity.
If I seem a bit sordid, it's only because I'm trying to communicate with him on his own level.Regardless of whether we consider Grayson a lunatic, an evil aggressor, or whatever, if he bites me I will bite back.
Now, I don't want to overwork the story about how he plans to destroy the heart and fabric of our nation, so let's just say that he has been trying for some time to convince people that he should worsen an already unstable situation because "it's the right thing to do".
Don't believe his hype!
Grayson has just been offering that line as a means to place beastly vagrants at the head of a nationwide kakistocracy.Whether the downfall of our culture can be arrested by a violent rejection of Grayson's smarmy crotchets, I am unable to decide; that would require forces with whose existence I am unacquainted.
Nevertheless, you may want to consider that it would be great if all of us could kick butt and take names.
In the end, however, money talks and you-know-what walks.
Perhaps that truism also explains why this makes me fearful that I might someday find myself in the crosshairs of Grayson's untrustworthy newsgroup postings.
(To be honest, though, it wouldn't be the first time.
) Grayson is frightened that we might take a strong position on his commentaries, which, after all, label everyone he doesn't like as a racist, sexist, fascist, communist, or some equally terrible "-ist".
That's why he's trying so hard</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530806</id>
	<title>Faux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261484820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fox (fucks with the) news<br>

Close the page now and no-one will get hurt.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fox ( fucks with the ) news Close the page now and no-one will get hurt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fox (fucks with the) news

Close the page now and no-one will get hurt.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531388</id>
	<title>Re:Website no longer necessary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261489020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hope mycongressmanisnuts.com carries advertising, 'cause this dick move is going to drive a metric shitload of traffic to the site!</p></div><p> The domain name would be a nice beginning for a political social network site focused on negative campaigns against politicians all over the country. The part 'my' is very appropriate in this context.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope mycongressmanisnuts.com carries advertising , 'cause this dick move is going to drive a metric shitload of traffic to the site !
The domain name would be a nice beginning for a political social network site focused on negative campaigns against politicians all over the country .
The part 'my ' is very appropriate in this context .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope mycongressmanisnuts.com carries advertising, 'cause this dick move is going to drive a metric shitload of traffic to the site!
The domain name would be a nice beginning for a political social network site focused on negative campaigns against politicians all over the country.
The part 'my' is very appropriate in this context.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527044</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528174</id>
	<title>Re:While Grayson can be entertaining</title>
	<author>SwashbucklingCowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1261473000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Jail for a website?"</p><p>Damn, not only can you not read the article, you can't even bother to read the summary.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Jail for a website ?
" Damn , not only can you not read the article , you ca n't even bother to read the summary .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Jail for a website?
"Damn, not only can you not read the article, you can't even bother to read the summary.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526632</id>
	<title>MySpace?</title>
	<author>smitty777</author>
	<datestamp>1261511100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if she can go to jail for using that particular name on a site, can I go to jail for having a MySpace page?  What about MyYahoo? MyWay?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if she can go to jail for using that particular name on a site , can I go to jail for having a MySpace page ?
What about MyYahoo ?
MyWay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if she can go to jail for using that particular name on a site, can I go to jail for having a MySpace page?
What about MyYahoo?
MyWay?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526866</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What she's doing wrong is claiming to be an issue group when she's actually attacking a specific congressman. The whole "My" thing is a smokescreen that Faux News is focusing on so people don't see that the real problem here is that the Repugnicans are funding these little astroturf groups to go after each Democrat, and so help their Repugnican opponents in 2010 - funneling money into these groups and pretending that they are *not* funneling soft money into campaigns.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What she 's doing wrong is claiming to be an issue group when she 's actually attacking a specific congressman .
The whole " My " thing is a smokescreen that Faux News is focusing on so people do n't see that the real problem here is that the Repugnicans are funding these little astroturf groups to go after each Democrat , and so help their Repugnican opponents in 2010 - funneling money into these groups and pretending that they are * not * funneling soft money into campaigns .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What she's doing wrong is claiming to be an issue group when she's actually attacking a specific congressman.
The whole "My" thing is a smokescreen that Faux News is focusing on so people don't see that the real problem here is that the Repugnicans are funding these little astroturf groups to go after each Democrat, and so help their Repugnican opponents in 2010 - funneling money into these groups and pretending that they are *not* funneling soft money into campaigns.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527578</id>
	<title>Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261514400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Having finally solved all the major problems facing the United States, Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail.</p></div><p>Fixed that for you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having finally solved all the major problems facing the United States , Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail.Fixed that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having finally solved all the major problems facing the United States, Florida Rep. Alan Grayson wants to see one of his critics go directly to jail.Fixed that for you.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527894</id>
	<title>Re:This seems silly on the surface</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261515360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using "my" in the name of her website because she really isn't his constituent.  Is this all there is to this story?  Bear in mind, the only source I've found is Fox News which isn't exactly balanced reporting (if any of them are).</p></div><p>Are you freaking lazy or what?</p><p>Go to www.google.com<br>Click the "News" link up at the top.<br>Type "Grayson" in the textbox by the "Search News" button<br>Click the "Search News" button<br>Look at the top results.<br>Follow links.<br>Read.<br>Maybe learn stuff, but I'm doubtful in your case.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using " my " in the name of her website because she really is n't his constituent .
Is this all there is to this story ?
Bear in mind , the only source I 've found is Fox News which is n't exactly balanced reporting ( if any of them are ) .Are you freaking lazy or what ? Go to www.google.comClick the " News " link up at the top.Type " Grayson " in the textbox by the " Search News " buttonClick the " Search News " buttonLook at the top results.Follow links.Read.Maybe learn stuff , but I 'm doubtful in your case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At first glance it appears that a Democratic congressman is suing a blogger for using "my" in the name of her website because she really isn't his constituent.
Is this all there is to this story?
Bear in mind, the only source I've found is Fox News which isn't exactly balanced reporting (if any of them are).Are you freaking lazy or what?Go to www.google.comClick the "News" link up at the top.Type "Grayson" in the textbox by the "Search News" buttonClick the "Search News" buttonLook at the top results.Follow links.Read.Maybe learn stuff, but I'm doubtful in your case.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30532018</id>
	<title>Re:Her Constituent Status Is Only Part of It</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1261495800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Alan Grayson is Nuts

Name calling is uncivilized and indicates that the person doing the name calling has no case and probably should not be listened to on any substantived matter.  It, however, a matter of free speech.

It should be perfectly legal for me to say that Kay Bailey Hutchenson has all the attributes of a drug smuggler, if in fact she is not one. That Bush and Limbaugh are terrorists because they were,and probably continue to be part of the illegal drug trade(trade in prescription drugs without</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Alan Grayson is Nuts Name calling is uncivilized and indicates that the person doing the name calling has no case and probably should not be listened to on any substantived matter .
It , however , a matter of free speech .
It should be perfectly legal for me to say that Kay Bailey Hutchenson has all the attributes of a drug smuggler , if in fact she is not one .
That Bush and Limbaugh are terrorists because they were,and probably continue to be part of the illegal drug trade ( trade in prescription drugs without</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Alan Grayson is Nuts

Name calling is uncivilized and indicates that the person doing the name calling has no case and probably should not be listened to on any substantived matter.
It, however, a matter of free speech.
It should be perfectly legal for me to say that Kay Bailey Hutchenson has all the attributes of a drug smuggler, if in fact she is not one.
That Bush and Limbaugh are terrorists because they were,and probably continue to be part of the illegal drug trade(trade in prescription drugs without
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528392</id>
	<title>Re:The question, really, is this:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261473960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Politics in the first world are based at more or less extent in lying, exaggerating trivial issues, drawing questionable analogies and mouthing "fuddle duddle" to your opponents, then going to cry in a corner. It's not a crime, it's the poetry of the trade!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Politics in the first world are based at more or less extent in lying , exaggerating trivial issues , drawing questionable analogies and mouthing " fuddle duddle " to your opponents , then going to cry in a corner .
It 's not a crime , it 's the poetry of the trade !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Politics in the first world are based at more or less extent in lying, exaggerating trivial issues, drawing questionable analogies and mouthing "fuddle duddle" to your opponents, then going to cry in a corner.
It's not a crime, it's the poetry of the trade!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527334</id>
	<title>Re:Streisand....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261513560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;he doesn't roll over and take it in the ass from the republicans like most democrats do,</p><p>Are you kidding me?  The current agenda is straight out of the GOP playbook right?</p><p>Do you liberals, really believe you are losing legislatively?  Really?    WOW.<br>I would hate to see what you winning looks like?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; he does n't roll over and take it in the ass from the republicans like most democrats do,Are you kidding me ?
The current agenda is straight out of the GOP playbook right ? Do you liberals , really believe you are losing legislatively ?
Really ? WOW.I would hate to see what you winning looks like ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;he doesn't roll over and take it in the ass from the republicans like most democrats do,Are you kidding me?
The current agenda is straight out of the GOP playbook right?Do you liberals, really believe you are losing legislatively?
Really?    WOW.I would hate to see what you winning looks like?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526460</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526762</id>
	<title>Re:I call bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1261511520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It appears you have attempted to make a right-leaning post. Your internet credentials have been downgraded. Your access is now confined to sending email forwards to your relatives and coworkers that accuse government officials of being terrorists.</p><p>Have a nice day,<br>The Management</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It appears you have attempted to make a right-leaning post .
Your internet credentials have been downgraded .
Your access is now confined to sending email forwards to your relatives and coworkers that accuse government officials of being terrorists.Have a nice day,The Management</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It appears you have attempted to make a right-leaning post.
Your internet credentials have been downgraded.
Your access is now confined to sending email forwards to your relatives and coworkers that accuse government officials of being terrorists.Have a nice day,The Management</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526686</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30540980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527048
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30535646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529062
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526812
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527044
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526672
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526632
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526460
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_22_1738232_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526534
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527032
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30540980
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528392
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530154
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526472
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528174
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526498
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526760
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529408
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529434
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529262
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30530930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526672
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528554
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527048
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30535646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526704
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526390
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526686
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526812
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527564
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529098
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527548
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526740
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528212
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527110
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528748
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529690
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30526832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30529104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_22_1738232.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30527044
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30531388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_22_1738232.30528452
</commentlist>
</conversation>
