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.

Pastimes : NNBM - SI Branch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elpolvo who wrote (24203)	3/5/2003 7:27:32 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 104167

"no offense, but i'm so busy right now that i have time for little more than one liners" Yup, 22 & counting since my post, with at least 11 being more than one liners...... but who's counting :- OOF ;-) "i thought the exchanges between you and HG were pretty honest and good. of course i'm biased, but i liked her points better than yours. " I certainly agree that you are biased then. You see my original response was in regard to revisionist history being used to make slanderous personal attacks on the President. No one seemed to have a problem with that except me. No one disputed that part of my rebuttal at all. Rather than refuting the revisionist history, folks just piled on with other straw man arguments and continued to slander the President & be disrespectful toward me. All I did was to point out what was going on & how I felt it had more to do with hate & personal bias than reality. When additional POV's were brought to the table, replete with more reasons to fault the President I discussed them as well. But as I rebutted each new reason to find fault with the President, it became apparent the debate was simply a moving target by those who disagreed with me. They weren't attempting to refute the factual basis for my responses that discredited their reason to attack the President. They were simply bringing new misperceptions (straw men) as they changed the debate on the fly, but they did continue to find fault with the President at every step of the way. IMHO, that's one of the sad things about deep seated bias. After an exchange like that, these folks & their peers all feel like they won the debate hands down & they reaffirmed many of the reasons why they dislike the other guy........ regardless of the facts or reality. I left the debate thinking that they still believe the original premise that has no basis in fact & many of the moving targets they brought up along the way were typical straw man arguments that were used to deride the President with (& eventually myself), just as the original post was used for. But hey, you did say you were biased. I guess I just reaffirmed my POV on the subject. JMHO BWTHDIK OOF Ö¿Ö