--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues" <curtisdeltabl...@...> wrote: > > -- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > I never called you a liar Judy. > > > > Well, ya know, Curtis, when you say you "trust > > reasonable people to see through this obvious routine," > > it's hard to interpret that any way but as an > > accusation of lying. > > No because in another place in the post I don't accuse > you of running a routine so they cancel out right? > But if reasonable people conclude that you are not > being truthful I would understand. Personally I think > it is odder than that.
This is beneath even you. > > It's so *not* a routine. As I said, I *started out* by > > making it clear I thought Willytex's remark was shitty. > > I didn't change my mind several posts later. I never > > suggested it was OK for him to have said what he said. > > Obviously it wasn't clear to me. Obviously it's *still* not clear to you. Seems pretty simple to me. What was obvious was > your criticism of me. When you later said you shared > his feeling about me (ones you imagined on his his behalf) One I explicitly said I *suspected* I shared with Willytex. Please continue taking out all the qualifiers from everything I say; it's fun putting them back in to show how you like to twist things. > it confirmed it for me. That part you were clear about. Curtis, yours was an appalling remark. > > If I say that professor in Alabama killing a bunch of > > people was a reaction to her not getting tenure, is > > that *defending* her? Especially if I started out by > > saying it was a terrible, reprehensible crime? > > Not the same thing at all. You said: > > <I suspect he was commenting on your hypocrisy, as am I.> > > By sharing the values you excuse the behavior. Oh, please. So everyone who opposes abortion excuses the behavior of that guy who murdered the abortion doctor. After all, they share his values, don't they? > Other than you being a hypocrite about this issue ROTFL! So now *I'm* a hypocrite. This is getting better and better. > I couldn't care less. I can handle Richard. I guess > that is why you accused me of being hypocritical without > explaining why. Guilty conscience. Because you didn't > stand up against his outrageous accusation, you piled on, > excusing it. Keep going, Curtis. > > Get real. That isn't how it works. > > > > Again, what you're trying to avoid is the issue of > > whether *your* remark was shitty, your "joke" about > > Jackson's death. > > Here you are mindreading. I am avoiding nothing. I > have spent plenty of time on exactly why I have > contempt for Micheal and mock his stupid death. No matter *how* much contempt one has for a person, and even if that contempt were completely justified, one doesn't mock his death, not if one has any class. Guilty conscience, I'd say. IMHO, of course. > Your are being sanctimonious here. We don't share the > same dark humor about him but you are trying to make it > into a case of character like you are the Church Lady > and I am a sinner. Fuck Michael and all like him. The Church Lady would probably agree with you about Jackson, actually. She wouldn't use the same language, but she'd make it clear it was a shame he didn't die in prison and snicker about how he did die. > I don't care who > thinks expressing that sentiment is shitty. Oh, that must be why you've made such a huge fuss about what I said. Not to mention what Willytex said. <snip> > And you know how I know you are an insufferable bore? > Because I have already shown you the proof that you > did defend him Boy, you're sure stuck with that lie, aren't you?
