SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bill who wrote (12278)11/2/1998 12:38:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh  Respond to of 67261
 
I started the name calling? Preceding the post you refer to, where I "started" name calling, you had posted to me, that day the following:

While you're busy pontificating on the conflicts in your troubled life, how about an answer to my question.

Where and when did George Bush lie under oath? (Remember that hateful wild ranting accusatory post of yours?) Just wondering.

Look, I'm not your shrink. Go rant to someone else.

Just tell me when and where George Bush lied under oath, as you have alleged.

So, you admit that you invented that stuff about Bush lying under oath. Is that what you're telling me? Are you telling this thread that you are a liar? Or are you telling this thread that you are ignorant?


No name calling there. Well, at least not "direct" name calling. Very creative and indirect, Bill. Took me all of an hour to get back to you on the Bush thing, which was ample time to hurl voluminous additional quantity of the trademark Vaughn invective my way. That's all different, though.

And, of course, I can dig up copious quantities of direct and/or indirect name calling on your part preceding that day's interchange. That doesn't count either, though, right Bill? More creative humor on your part, so many ways you know to call people you disagree with idiots. That's substance for you. Leftist ad hominem ad nauseum.

Like I said, you can dish it out, but you can't take it.