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: Thomas A Watson who wrote (274930)	7/15/2002 1:18:42 AM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Because you are determined to harrange me about it, I will answer point for point your cut and paste post. This is for you only, I'm sure everyone else is fed up with this pissing match. "And with my opinions I provide your words that make exactly who you are self evident." And you pick and chose which words you'll use. I'm human and am bound to get angry when I am attacked. And you sir have attacked me over and over on this board. "And your current post would suggest that I have refuted you contention that I was attempting to harass you and intimidate you so you would not post." Not at all. You attack and attack and then you say "you are welcome to post here". I'd call that disingenuous. You have not at all refuted that contention. "If you take my simple statement that you are welcome to post here as permission, that idea of permission is just your expression of narrow minded sloppy interpretation. Your thoughts are an open book and as I quote you chapter and verse the self evident analysis of the meaning of your words is clear." I think your self righteous and patronizing idea that you see the truth that everyone else doesn't see is just delusion on your part. "There are rules of logic, honesty, integrity and honor. So yes I do police what you say and parse it with simple rules of of logic, honesty, integrity and honor. And you do not attempt to ever challenge any of my rules or propose others that challenge my interpretation of what how and wdy you think the way you do." I dont usually take the time to argue with delusional people. "You are welcome to post here as often as you like. It is good to have someone with such demonstrated narrow minded thinking, presenting the narrow minded thinking point of view. Bias, hate, smear, vulgarity, what does the narrow minded thinking point of view think is it's enemy. The more you post the more all will know." This is also very disingenuous. "You have never attempted once to defend one of your assertions." same as above. "I believe I have refuted all of your assertions." You have ignored most of my assertions. The ones you have addressed you have not refuted. "You go down the posting path so predictable..... #reply-17735333 Once again Mark Anderson asserts that I've changed the rules and Mark Anderson also says that I've attempted to deny Mark Anderson the right to post slander, vulgarity, lies and insults or anything. I have not changed any rules." You attack personally anyone who makes statements you dont like. If you can't see that that is an intimidation tactic then you are stupid. "have just used Mark Anderson's posts to illustrate what is unAmerican thinking" This is another attack and intimidation. "and I have explained my rationale as to why I call Mark Anderson's thinking unAmerican." America is based on freedom of ideas and the right to dissent. An unAmerican idea would be, for instance to dis-allow people to express their ideas. That I dont like the president does not make my thinking unAmerican. If you think it does then we have completely different ideas as to what America represents. "So to refute Mark Anderson's assertions, I simply quote Mark Anderson ." You pick and chose and take comments out of context. And I admit I have gotten angry from time to time. "I have seen Mark Anderson name calling and slandering from his very first posts. #reply-17724769 #reply-17724852 Hey, if daddy Bush's appointees decide not to pursue it, that's their choice. I dont have to take at face value their BS reasons for it. Yes anyone who does not like PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH's family can chose to make statements suggesting all those he dislikes are dishonest and lying. That what BS reasons are, lying." This started with J La's assertion that because the SEC had declined to pursue the case that Bush was innocent. Case Closed. I was disagreeing with him. Even the SEC boilerplate says that them not pursuing the case was not to be taken as an exoneration of him from any wrongdoing, or something to that effect. "Just because you are to stupid to see your own immediately resort to name calling and slander, anyone who is not biased and is honest sees exactly how your do what you say you decry." I dont immediately resort to personal attack every time someone says something I dont like, like you do. "So in review of Mark Anderson, self admitted poster child of unAmerican name calling and slander...." That is not true. "Mark says LOL.... "I guess it is obvious to anyone on the receiving end of their spray that they don't want us around." Actually Mark Anderson's directly quotable one liners that show so perfectly unAmerican vacant liberal minded lefty loonism is richly enjoyed. I love your comic routine of such transparent bias and bigotry of thought. The emotion sans reason of your words are ROTFLOL material." This is just another persoanl attack by you. "Mark, by the way this is America and you have every right to be all the unAmerican vacant liberal minded lefty loon you can be. LOL" And be attacked for it on this thread. "The fact that you are so completely clueless to what you are really saying is hilarious." yada yada yada "You words are so clear and specific that you are my poster child example of the vacant liberal minded lefty loon smear monger. That is not a complement... LOL" yada yada yada "WHY...... What's funny as hell???? LOL #reply-17733388 "Pure partisanism cloaked in self righteous pseudo patriotism." ROTFLOL..... This is just my simple analysis of Mark Anderson SPEAK..." Great. So we each think the other is a bigot. No news there. "Well you start with a vulgar insult. LOL Then you proffer you only were making an innocent statement. From: Mark Anderson #reply-17733331 "My point about the SEC was that they have simply declined to pursue the case against Bush. That is not a declaration of no wrong doing." If you believe that is all you said, you are a fool, an idiot. " The SEC says as much in their report boilerplate. That was my point. Sloppily made. "I make my case just quoting you and what you have said and I explain why what you have said violates my ideas of what being and American with Sacred Honor in his heart is. The typical Mark Anderson perception and method of judgement. From: Mark Anderson #reply-17724980 "I dont give a shit what the SEC thinks or does" and because Mark Anderson by his own words From: Mark Anderson #reply-17724997 "I'll be honest. I dont like the whole family." Mark Anderson feels free declare... #reply-17725295 I see no defense of the fraudulent subsidiary purchase. Only hate can motivate someone to ignore informed opinions and slander the honor of another. To make an assertive judgement that a fraudulent subsidiary purchase occurred and PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH was involved." Well the SEC also disallowed them to count this as a valid transaction the way they filed it and forced them to re-state their 1989 corporate results in 1991. So I guess now the whole SEC is full of hate on your judgement. "My mind is closed to the above thinking method of rational that asserts another has no honor. Wether that is the President and or every member of the SEC. This assertion, because one doesn't like a family, that anyone or many are dishonest and without honor." Take your complaints up with the SEC.. It was their conclusion that I was referring to. "To me the above method of thinking is UnAmerican. It violates the constitutional rights of a fellow American or many." This is your problem. You take your mis-understanding and parlay it into a philosophical stance. "I have not guessed that you have made a dishonest statement. My rules of being an American prevents me from doing that. I have taken you at your word and used your words to illustrate my definition of a hateful unAmerican mind. " I guess you never understood that the SEC was the ones that disallowed the subsidiary purchase to be counted the way Harken wanted and forced them to re state their 1989 earnings. And you accuse me of being un informed! "I dislike individuals who have acted in ways that are dishonest. There actions do not affect how I feel about other members of that individuals family. I find it mind boggling that anyone would transfer dislike in such a manner. I accept that their are individuals who do think in this very hateful and unAmerican way." Here is another big assumption on your part. I have my reasons why I dont like other members of the family. So your big accusation here is based on an assumtion that is not correct. I did not transfer dilike in the manner you say. "As an American these words of the Declaration sum it up. "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." A person who respects his own sacred Honor cannot dislike an entire family or disregard the informed opinions of others and guess that others are making dishonest statements. " I would say to this, who is the one who is disregarding the informed opinion of others. It's you. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you didn't know that Harken had to restate it's 1989 results in 1991. "When Mark Anderson who thinks as I have described with his own words calls me close minded to his way of thinking, I rejoice in the complement. " I guess I'm done.