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 : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fut_trade who wrote (22696)	9/3/2006 12:39:52 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Asked & answered. Read the last 4 paragraphs - 2 copied from the article & 2 written by me in my response to you (see at link). Message 22775565 I think you need to learn the difference between what specifically is said & when something is clearly being deduced or inferred. I am now certain that your reading comprehension skills need serious improvement. Think about that for a second. The article NEVER claims or even infers Frist "lied". There is ZERO evidence to support your allegation. I challenge you to support your assertion. You simply can't cite any credible evidence within the article to substantiate your assertion. Instead you move the goalposts to make a second unsupportable assertion ("blunders" "plagued with incompetence"). I make a deduction that is supported by information within the article. I state the article "makes it clear that...". What do you do? You claim that the article doesn't specifically quote my words (what I deduced from the article) & you state, << "There is no mention that the Dept. of Health said that. This is not in the article you pasted. Where did you get this from???" >> I NEVER said the article specifically states mistakes were "not all that uncommon", yet somehow that is what you incorrectly deduced. In response I quote the supporting passage from the article verbatim. Then I provide two additional paragraphs of analysis that clearly support my original deduction. What do you do? You claim I have avoided addressing your question. I see a pattern developing here. Do you?

To: fut_trade who wrote (22696)	9/3/2006 12:50:17 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

<< "How much do you make per post?" >> Given the context of your entire reply to me (which is completely wrong on your part), how does that snide comment differ from an unwarranted personal attack? That is a clear attack on my character that has no basis in reality whatsoever. You have already been warned about this. You can either retract that baseless personal attack & apologize or suffer the consequences. It's your choice. Do not post on this thread again until you have specifically addressed this post to my satisfaction.