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

To: Neocon who wrote (33493)	2/11/1999 3:43:00 AM
From: Jack Be Quick	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

Hmmm... "He cannot stand the idea that those who oppose Clinton might have normal reasons, and so he has to make up all sorts of defamatory claims." ... "But it turns out that he is more than a clumsy and somewhat over- zealous debater. There is genuine bad faith involved, and a curious animus." Gosh, Neotubbie, if you hadn't already indicated to us how clever you are (over and over again), I'd swear it looks to me as though you are conspicuously guilty of doing to Daniel exactly the thing that you are complaining about. Which is very slick, in a defamatory sort of way. (Is this what passes for clever debate in your circles, or are you merely testing us to see if anyone is paying attention?) "Daniel is full of common debaters foibles: an excessive reliance on citations; a constant search for something to pounce on, rather than a willingness to engage the full thrust of an opponent's arguments;..." Is this a big problem for you, Neotubbie, that your debating partners are unwilling to "engage the full thrust of your arguments"? Man, what a bummer that must be. You know, there's probably a thread for that sort of thing on SI somewhere. Have you tried the Let's Talk About Our Feelings thread?