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: Sully- who wrote (692917)	7/20/2005 3:22:00 AM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

I'll leave it up to others on the board to se his hypocrisy. He says we shouldn't judge and then he goes ahead and judges in almost the next breath. ROFL!!!!! But of course he couldn't be a hypocrite because he is a righty and we all know that it is inconceivable for a righty to be a hypocrite. LOL!!!!!!!!! Look at the post again. I am posting directly from his article. I am not putting words in his mouth that were not in the article. That is a false charge. They are direct quotes. I guess we all know what it looks like when a righty "withholds judgement"!!

To: Sully- who wrote (692917)	7/23/2005 2:43:06 AM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

In this response you make a false accusation. That being that by taking his comments out of context I was changing the meaning of the comments. You have not shown this to be true. It is, in fact false. My assertion is true. That he says we should withhold judgement, and then goes ahead and ignores his own advice by asserting "Have you heard that the CIA is actually the source responsible for exposing Plame's covert status?" He is in fact passing judgement. The he ignores his own advice again when he comments: "Had you heard not only that no crime was committed in the communication of information between Bush administration officials and Novak, but that no crime could have been committed because the governing law gives a person a complete defense if an agent's status has already been compromised by the government?" Well it looks like we don't even need a justice system after all. We have this author that is pronouncing truth as if from on high, while at the same time saying that we should "withhold judgement". Instead of having a justice system we should just ask this author to pass judgement, which he seems very inclined to do. You have not shown in any way that the meaning of his comments were distorted by my supposed "taking them out of context". Their meaning seems pretty self-evident to me. While making his bigger point he steps right into a big hypocritical contradiction himself. You choose to ignore that fact. I don't.