Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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: Bill who wrote (24586)	8/24/2001 2:52:42 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Hold it! I don't think E was lying either. More like refusal to accept that there might be another way to see the meaning of the post... JLA

To: Bill who wrote (24586)	8/24/2001 3:07:36 PM
From: E	Respond to of 82486

Was it not a lie because he is too dumb to know the difference, or because attribution of a negative (I say demonizing) self-description to an enemy of yours who never made it is not a lie? It is being sold by your side as a 'characterization,' of course. But in fact, it is an untrue statement she said something about herself she didn't. How is that a 'characterization,' except insofar as it is his, extracted by extrapolation, of her? The question is, did she describe herself as he said she did. In the case of the blonde, in the case of brees, was the attribution true or not, and do you defend it or not. In the case of the blonde, you don't.