Quote:
Originally Posted by bhkad
You are so full of it.
I WANT PEOPLE TO READ MY POST!
If they read it they will see it is a quote from my text.
|
Quoting your own text comes AFTER the act was done.
Not before...
And I challenged you to show ANYWHERE where you have used that "technique" before.
Predictably, no response...
And like I said, you dishonestly claimed you were answering MY question.
That was YOUR claim.
But what you really did was turn around and answer YOUR OWN question, when you were claiming to answer mine?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
You attack the poster because you can't refute his comments.
|
You're ignoring the REAL point.
You CLAIM an "attack on the poster" when it's you or Corsi, IGNORING the fact that people are JUST SPEAKING FACTUALLY about the situation.
But when Corsi attacks the president, it is NOT FACTUAL. It's a lie. A claim without substantiation.
The "Boy Who Cried Wolf" could come on here and insist that Bush did wrong in the Plame affair, and you'd use his history to refute him.
But when it's an attack on Obama, the legitimacy of the claim is ASSUMED...
One standard for Scott McClellan's criticism of the president.
Another for any criticism of Obama, which must be presumed accurate regardless of the source.
Amazing how that works...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bhkad
You attack the author because you can't refute his comments.
|
As has been previously been pointed out, BOTH his comments AND his character have been refuted.
YOU CANNOT substantiate his claims, so you IGNORE that aspect and instead make inaccurate assessments of what has really gone on.