You fool, lol. I didn't leave that out to cover-up Maher's thoughts. We all likely know what he thinks about the war, your post showed that along WITH mine, as I left plenty of his comments in (suggestion that Gore reads, bush doesn't & Gore would focus, Bush wouldn't, etc.). I cut some other stuff in the middle too, I think I did, because I happened to want to focus on what DAN SENOR had to say. I'll point out too, that your post itself began to back up what I'd reported Maher had said on his show when he spoke of the long-range possibilities, it's just that you used a completely different show, and claimed I'd editorialized, when in fact I've shown I reported highly accurately as to Maher believing that in 10-20-50 years, Dan Senor may very well prove to be right.
You can say Maher is wrong if he believes that, but believe it he does, as shown.
Re: "But I didn't edit any of it as you did...to try to say that Maher supports what went on in Iraq"
I edited nothing to try to say, and did not at all indicate, that Maher supports what "went on in Iraq." You should be apologizing for the above allegation without me even asking (because it just isn't in my posts as alleged). I told the truth, and used Maher because we all likely know he's against Bush and the War. I said "The war made sense, still makes sense, and still is seen as something that certainly can prove itself (as Bill Maher acknowleged he believes it may well for the long term reasons noted on his show last night)."
I gave you Dan Senors long term reasons, and informed you what Maher had to say about the issue at hand. I was accurate, as shown, you (warning: Ad Hominem ahead) twisted weasel.
Dan B. |
