Re: Larry Niven: Terrorize Latinos to Solve Health Care Crisis

On Sun, 04 May 2008 15:49:33 -0400, dbd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (David DeLaney)
wrote:

>John Schilling <schillin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>dbd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (David DeLaney) wrote:
>>>John Schilling <schillin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>John Schilling wrote:
>>>>>> "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>[earlier attribs lost]
>>>>>> Whereas not three hours after I made my original statement, I
noticed
>>>>>> the term being used, straight up, in an article in the Los Angeles
>>>>>> times.  I didn't check the byline, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't
>>>>>> Rush Limbaugh.  And whoever it was, seemed quite sympathetic to
>>>>>> the liberal cause du jour he was writing about.

>>>>>Given that the Times is almost entirely online these days, no doubt 
>>>>>you can provide a URL.

>>>>What an annoying, insulting little request.  Of course I *can* provide
>>>>a URL; is there any particular reason why I *should*?

>>>Because it was your claim originally, and you're pulling this in to
support
>>>it? Reacting all like "I don't have to provide that URL! I am insulted!
>>><flounces off stage left>" when asked where you saw something you say
you
>>>just recently saw and bring in as support for your earlier contention
leads
>>>most of the rest of us to think "uh-huh, doesn't actually exist". 

>>"Most of the rest of us"?

>>Can you provide a source for your claim that most of the rest of this
>>newsgroup, thinks the Los Angeles Times article I referred to does not
exist?

>Certainly: the fact that you have again failed to provide a link or
>reference to it, instead typing out two paragraphs of stuff changing the
>subject to what I might or might not think and whether you COULD be
possibly
>mistaken. More smoke; less substance.

That is not a source, that is an assertion.  It is, at best, a reason
why a person *might* believe I am lying, not evidence that anyone but
you actually *does*.  Other people, even starting from the same evidence,
might come to different conclusions.

They might also like to speak for themselves, rather than letting you
do it.


>>>Regardless of whether or not it does exist and/or you did see it.

>>It does, and I did.  

>That's nice; where is it then?

Same place as the cite for your claim that the lurkers all support you
in email, or whatever.


>>As are you.  Again, I repeat my question regarding the basis for your
>>claim that the majority of this newsgroup shares your belief that I am
>>lying in this matter.

>If not lying, then dancing as hard as you can around and around the
>question you were asked, as though cockroaches abounded.

Oh, much worse that cockroaches.  But enough with the weasel-wording;
either accuse me of lying, or don't.  If nothing else, we'll get that
out in the open.


-- 
*John Schilling                    * "Anything worth doing,         *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP       *  is worth doing for money"     *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner *    -13th Rule of Acquisition   *
*White Elephant Research, LLC      * "There is no substitute        *
*John.Schillin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
      *  for success"                  *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795      *    -58th Rule of Acquisition   *