--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > Not only did Curtis not come to me in an open, > > straightforward manner, the dishonesty of his > > response was even greater than that of his > > original bogus comparison. > > > > That comparison was offensive and insulting, a > > deliberate attempt at guilt by association. > > There were all sorts of comparisons he *could* > > have made on the basis you suggest above > > ("incomplete information and ignorance") that > > would have been entirely unproblematic and > > would have made his point a lot more clearly. > > > > That you *support* him in the comparison he did > > make, and in his dishonest responses to my > > pointing out how offensive it was, tells me, as > > I say, all I need to know about your own > > intellectual integrity. > > > > "May not be 100% congruent," indeed. > > > > Excuse me while I go take a bath. > > After 36 -- now 37 -- posts like this in less > than four days, I think the people who need > a bath are us. > > Have a good time in limbo, Judy, inflicting > your venom on those who have to put up with > it between now and Friday midnight. We don't.
I went over accidentally, but I'm going to go ahead and increment my sin by one more post before I leave for the weekend, to point out that: (1) About a third of my posts here this week have been positive or at least not unpleasant. (2) Of the negative ones, the great majority were in response to Barry's or Vaj's *unprovoked* attacks on me. In other words, Barry is lying through his teeth again, as well as attacking me one more time without provocation, and bathing himself in the grossest kind of hypocrisy.
