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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (261582)	6/6/2002 11:48:44 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I haven't really been following this exchange, but I just read the Salon article. Frankly, I don't think that Bush was lying according to the usual connotation of the term "conversation", nor is it demonstrated that he substantially interferred. Most people, myself included, would not characterize a superficial, jocular exchange at the doorpost as a "conversation".........

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (261582)	6/6/2002 12:01:34 PM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

No habitual liar buddy mckee, you have posted no statements. You obviously don't know what a statement is. You have posted conjectures of taking heads based upon charges made by dem politicians. You have declared that this is fact and that is lie. Just as you continue to dodge, weave and now just declare I did not lie. You have no proof of your original lie of a statement of fact and I'd guess you know there is none. So as you once said this is easy to prove, well were you lying again or just demonstrating stupidity. Fools playing words games with after the fact conjecture on parts of words taken out of context fabricate smear for sludgeheads. SO as I have posted.. Poor habitual liar Buddy McKee has given up on trying to post anything that supports his lying proffers. Game Set Match..... The habitual liar Buddy McKee would assume it is not a lie as he fabricates in his own mind words of others, words he has never seen so he can lie. that is the parsing of lies in the mind of the habitual liar Buddy McKee. The lying Buddy McKee declared explicitly that another had lied. The liar Buddy McKee was asked to qualify his declaration and he reaffirmed his declaration of the lie. These are the posts and this is plain and simple speak to the liar Buddy McKee. Liars never get plain simple speak. It would then seem that the liar who publishes on this thread as Buddy McKee has shown himself the liar #reply-17551269 and #reply-17551351. If Buddy McKee chooses to declare others have lied and it's all fabrication then Buddy McKee is the liar. So I propose all from now on refer to the liar Buddy McKee as lying Buddy McKee or the liar Buddy McKee. As Buddy Mckee admitted that John Edwards who claims to speak with the dead gave him no such information and he has presented no information Buddy Mckee has proved himself the liar. Lies were posted in #reply-17551269 and #reply-17551351 and the lies have not been recanted. by the lying Buddy Mckee who also make funs of others as they speak plainly. The meaning of perjury and oath are understood by all just as the lies of Buddy McKee are understood. In previous dialog the lying buddy mckee spoke of testimony as the basis for stating lying had occurred and lying buddy mckee had never heard or seen any such testimony. Only a liar would state that another had lied declared as fact when the liar clearly knows that it is his fantasy. The truly stupid habitual liar will think it makes no difference. It would now seem the lying buddy mckee is conforming to the characteristics of the truly stupid habitual liar. tom watson tosiwmee #reply-17559908