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 : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Dietrich who wrote (113995)	1/31/2008 11:08:42 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 173976

You are of course lying ... again. As you see hypocrites around every corner and by your own admission you are one. " Like all hypocrites you are what you claim to stand against." "But that's what you are, what you do: You smear, you lie, you're a partisan hack. Like all hypocrites you are what you claim to stand against." I haven't smeared anyone. You frequently do. I haven't lied about anything. You've lied about me repeatedly. I am not a partisan hack for any party. You are a predictable Dem loyalist on every issue. Here is my statement on the issue of the Chronicles: >>>"I've said the clinton insiders and eye witnesses seemed credible but I withheld my own full endorsement as I admit I haven't researched each allegation and you've offered no information that would discredit the witnesses." Message 24253185 "Only an immoral lying hack such as yourself would propagate such a smear, calling it credible no less, and then just walk away as if it were nothing. In what moral universe do you live where such indecent behavior acceptable?" As you can see by my statement I did not call it credible. I, in fact, withheld judgement on the chronicles. You have not with held judgement, you immediately cast your judgement on the credibility in spite of the bases on which the allegations were established because of course ... you are a lying hypocrite and all those other things in your pat list. And as you said, only an immoral hack would do such a thing. You are lying about the allegations being baseless. The eyewitnesses established the bases for their allegations and the eyewitnesses do seem credible. If one or more of them turn out to be wrong that doesn't make every allegation baseless and wrong, nor does it make all of the eyewitnesses lose credibility. If the chronicles as a whole turn out to be weak or flawed that doesn't reasonably conclude that everyone who participated was lying. It's no skin off my nose in any event. Argue and defend what ever you like as dishonorably as you like. Best regards, gem