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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (64641)	3/7/2008 8:55:01 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 90947

And what do you have in the "files" that's less than 2 years old? Nothing, You endlessly repeat the same crap. I pay no attention to you any longer. You're so predictable I could write your posts. You (among others) gave me the impetus to define that idea for myself, so thank you. Doesn't Jewel (RCG) get any credit? After endlessly posting "DON'T POST TO ME!" and being told I wouldn't if you'd stop replying (which idea must have take a few hundred posts to get through to you), and screaming and yelling about what a cad I was for replying to your replies, you then promptly ignored RCG's request that you leave him alone. He repeated countless times. On seeing this, I figured you needed a large dose of your own medicine.

To: epicure who wrote (64641)	3/8/2008 11:59:48 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

<< "And what do you have in the "files" that's less than 2 years old? Not much to choose from I'd guess. But if you find something, and it seems less than "perfect", I'll be the first to step up and say "I'm not perfect"- " ROTFLMAO! How many times are you going to repeat that thoroughly discredited canard? Myself & others have proven multiple times how self-deluded you are on this point. What you "feel" you are doing & what you actually do are two diametrically opposed things. That's a fact! No you ain't perfect X the UnMme! It'd be more precise to say you're anti-perfect. **************** Example 1 - Holy chit! Where do I start with this? It's chock full of lies, self-deception, blatant hypocrisy & personal attacks & it's less than 2 years old: Message 22680284 **************** Example 2 - A baseless personal attack & proof you are a liar in the above example. Message 22655905 ********************** Example 3 is also less than 2 years old: Here you call Peter Dierks an extremist while accusing him of doing a number of negative things. And for good measure you throw out several thoroughly discredited canards about Comrade Baker's management the "View". Message 22441547 And speaking of self delusion, I can't think of a more perfect example Message 22443638 And speaking of hypocrites, here you are defending Comrade Baker's banning of Hawkmoon because "he suggested that liberals didn't care about an issue" : Message 22436249 And here you continue to defend Comrade Baker's "peaceful" thread. Message 22449133 Now you know for a fact that lib's on the "View" (yourself & Comrade Baker included) regularly say far worse than anything Hawkmoon said. And often when they do it's a provable lie stated as fact. You & I both know you NEVER spoke out on any of those flagrant rule violations & you NEVER insisted that Comrade ban them either. *************** Example 4, where you compare some folks on SI to terrorists (you need to follow the link to LB's post). And you assert, "on SI people generalize too extremely-". Message 22604108 And here you call the liberal POV's on the "View", "brutal (yet polite) honesty". Message 22604014 *************** Example 5, where you attack Brumar89 personally. And once again you slander folks on SI, including Bill (see 2nd link) with the baseless, malicious assertion they wanted to see you dead. Then you attack everyone one that thread. Message 22681499 Message 22722549 ************************* Example 6 - In a follow up reply to Example 5, you attack everyone on that thread again. Message 22682661 ************************* Example 7, where you attack Brumar89 personally, then attack everyone on that thread. Message 22678082 **********************

To: epicure who wrote (64641)	3/9/2008 12:42:21 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

<< "And what do you have in the "files" that's less than 2 years old? Not much to choose from I'd guess." >> How does less than 24 hours sound? Here you call the regulars on this thread "disgusting". Message 24376610 BTW, the proper spelling is "there" in your personal attack sentence. So how do you manage to edit your posts more than an hour after they were originally posted (see the reply quote & time stamp)?

To: epicure who wrote (64641)	3/9/2008 1:12:52 AM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 90947

This is getting too easy. And you did it less than 22 hours after asserting you simply don't do it anymore. Here you call Oeconomicus & all the folks on this thread "losers". You told Oeconomicus, "and you came here to needle me- probably for the enjoyment of your threadmates." Seems like quite a few personal attacks to me. Message 24376864