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: Solon who wrote (41331)	12/21/2001 8:09:28 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 82486

Wow!!! It must hurt to be soooooooooo bitter and insecure..... JLA

To: Solon who wrote (41331)	12/21/2001 8:37:11 AM
From: bonnuss_in_austin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Hi, Solon! Good to see you!! bia / eom

To: Solon who wrote (41331)	12/21/2001 9:31:04 AM
From: one_less	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Valiant effort Solon. Very judgemental word "phoney." Your argument is largely based on the company kept and the position on the left/right continuum, which pretty much seems to mean you simply don't tolerate differences. I have also called Neocon names like "pompus" or "arrogant." I have sworn off flame wars so I wont even try to defend my past name calling offenses however near or far from the mark they be. What ever differences I have found through the struggles I have had with Neocon, I have never found him to be anything but sincere. JMO

To: Solon who wrote (41331)	12/21/2001 10:12:57 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Thanks for finally at least attempting to put some substance into your reckless charges. I have never pretended to be impartial, or to not have formed opinions. I have never pretended to be non- partisan. It may be that I have an affected style. It is certainly somewhat formal. But formality is not, in itself, phoniness. I make no pretense to be any smarter or better read than I, in fact, am. If you want to call me conceited, fine. That is not the same as phoniness. I make no pretense about politeness. I am, in fact, usually polite, although I reserve the right to skewer people when I think they deserve it. I have never pretended otherwise. Since I have never pretended to impartiality, I cannot have pretended to a "high- minded" impartiality. Since I have very little respect for you, at this point, your assessment of my character or intelligence leaves me cold. For example, if you did not quote anti- religious tracts form the last century at the drop of a hat, I might take seriously your point about being hidebound and anal about a particular religious, political, or cultural bias. But, alas, I cannot take you seriously. I am not sure whom you think I cheer on. I criticized Christopher for being mistaken and unfair to Poet, for example. I have objected to Carolyn for calling X a traitor. I stay out of the flamefests that Bill and Win get into. I have done little more than object to excessive criticism of jla. I have had arguments of some consequence with all of them, at one time or another, although you have not seen all of them. Jewel- of- the- West and I had a serious argument over my leniency as regards premarital sex. Christopher and I had a big argument over whether there was the remotest provocation for the Oklahoma City bombing. JLA and I have periodically argued over his posting style, I just do not break the relationship, which has other dimensions, over that alone. Bill and I had a bad patch over Kosovo, which I partially supported. The charge that somehow I use them surrepitiously is an old and preposterous one. It is a way of trying to substantiate your "suspicions" when there is little to complain about in my overt behavior. It is a way of slamming me irresponsibly. Well, anyway, it is nice to have your cards on the table. Thanks for that, at least......