To "own" an opinion? You talk like that?
Well, anyway, I think this reply of your was intended as a reply to something else, something about an opinion you own. Here is, slightly edited, the post I actually made to you. For your convenience, I will bold a couple of questions i'm curious to read your answers to.
To:jlallen who wrote (24025)
From: E Wednesday, Aug 22, 2001 4:34 PM
View Replies (3) | Respond to of 24118
...What I said to you was not a quote, or anything that purported falsely to be a quote, you understand.
I was making a point about your use of the word 'interpretation,' and about all the convenient 'interpretation' going on here, which reminded me of the way 'interpretation' has been used so frequently by politicians and lawyers and such, like Clinton, to evade taking responsibility for.... shall we call them 'inaccuracies'? I considered it 'fair comment,' the basis for the comparison having been explained, and the fact that it was comment and not quotation not having been obfuscated.
I feel it is uncivil to make cracks about the dearly departed, btw. I had departed and am very dear to you, I know. And I feel it is very uncivil to make cracks or negative characterizations on a moderated thread about individuals who are not allowed to reply. Does that ever happen on your thread?
I can't figure out why you are offended by being compared to someone who 'interprets' plain words that really require no interpretation-- words like 'is.' (Other words one could mention are just as plain, of course, and even more distasteful.) Why is this? Because you disapprove of his self-serving interpretations? |
