SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: jlallen who wrote (23212)8/19/2001 10:06:46 PM
From: E  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486
 
Pay close attention, poor baby. I will make it as simple as possible.

A statement that someone has mentioned things she has never said, or mentioned, a series of very specific things, is either true or false.

Either she said (mentioned) them, or she did not.

If she did not, then either the statement was made in error or it was a lie.

She did not.

If brees, the original retailer of the misstatement is simply intellectually incapable of distinguishing between a quote and a characterization, then it was made in error.

Same for you. Either you know the difference between a quote and characterizations-based-on-conclusions-drawn or you don't.

Your choice is: are you stupid or are you ignominious?



To: jlallen who wrote (23212)8/20/2001 8:49:12 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
Since X has expressly spoken against the human ability to discern truth, the mutability of the concept of justice, the inability to ground morality in self- evident principle, and the like, I am not sure what all of the fuss is about. Yes, X has her moral sentiments, but she is too smart to think that they are objective. brees may be putting it all in the harshest way possible, but he is not being essentially inaccurate........