--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "raunchydog" <raunchydog@...> wrote:
> If you going to slander me, back it up with a specific instance or apologize. Fact: I made a case for honesty. Your opinion: It was empty rhetoric. Fact: You confuse fact with opinion and conflate the two in the same sentence. Evidence? Raunchy, You slandered Sal. I am sorry that I don't recall all the details. You can look it up if you want. But I think it was generally acknowledged that you made a factual representation, that you refused to back down from even when confronted when clear evidence that this was the case. And if I recall the incident correctly, and I think I do, you indicated that Sal was not worthy of an apology from you. So there you have it. So, once again, talk about Judy's superior logic, talk about Judy's trouncing her opponents in arguments, but please spare me your pontificating about the need for unflinching honesty when participating in a public forum. I am not seeing that in the way you operate here. So once again, Read what you just wrote. That's enough therapy for one day, Steve. Session over. Five cents, please.>
