Assessing the Damage

[BT]

Yep, 2012 misrpresentations, starting to shape up to look alot like 2011

Nice.  I don't think I'm going to climb down to your level, at this time

You got there before i did. Long before I did.

[sirs]

Pointing out your theme & pattern of misrepresenting others is not going down any hole.  Calling people names is.  Sorry.  That's kinda how the way it sorks

[BT]

I'm sure you can back up your charges.That's kinda how the way it sorks

Or is it just obvious!!!!!

[sirs]

Oh, lemme count the ways- Misrepresenting sirs in:
This thread, implying some sort of sirs claim that Xo said he wants certain folks silenced
implying that sirs is a bigot towards the Muslim religion, for daring to not support a mosque being built near ground zero
implying that sirs supports the fairness doctrine, because he dares to point out media bias
The biggest was when I called you on one, and you tried to turn it around and demand an apology from me...or else.  And then kicked me out, for daring not to apologise for YOUR mispresenting me

I can go on, but those are the biggies, that have gone on thru-out 2011, and even before that.

And yea, you can then say, give me some quotes.  The issue then becomes do I want to take that kind of time necessary to search archives, that may or may not have them any more, due to some "glitch", or can I rest knowing that you know exactly what I'm talking about, as do most others, who have followed our back and forth, over the last year.  Given the holiday season, and family, I'll opt with the latter, and let you keep up with the name calling, if you so wish, or some deflection as to "see, no proof, no quotes"  I've provided you examples, per your request, and yea, they were pretty obvious, as well

If the saloon partrons are tired of this ever frequent Bt witch-hunt on sirs (and occasionally Cu4), I'll gladly step aside, for the good of the saloon's health.

[BT]

This thread, implying some sort of sirs claim that Xo said he wants certain folks silenced

Where did i do that?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Every debate with sirs ends in a perplexing muddle, as sirs denies that he really meant what he said or said what he meant to mean. Or whatever.

 

[sirs]

With the whatever part being all the arguement and associated implication of a claim I didn't supposedly make??

Riiiiiiiiiight       

[BT]

perhaps you should read reply 39 in the context of the thread and then tell the class where you came up with the idea that i said Cu4,you, or even any other Conservative expressed how others SHOULD be ignored. And then you can tell the class how if i never said it i am guilty of misrepresenting what you said.

And then you can admit to the class that it wasn't I that misrepresented but it was in fact you who misrepresented what i said.

[sirs]

Nice try, but if there wasn't any misrepresentation on your part, this would have ended after only reply #25.  The fact it didn't, and the fact you kept pushing a position/claim I never made, after reply #25, dare I see, "speaks volumes" to the class.  Culmunated with the xo-like personal insult tactic in reply #51.  Congrats.  Time to move on

[BT]

So the request for examples of you and or cu expressing how others SHOULD be ignored was a straw man? Because that demand really puzzled me.