That's okay.  Few people, if any, thought you would try to respond with
anything beyond name-calling.


From 4/23:

Are you really THAT incapable of following a simple thread?  Let's retrace
it for you.  Sauer was praising Goldwater's politics.  I pointed out some
of Goldwater's actual political views, views that Sauer attacks when
advanced today by LIVING politicians, and then asked if his praise of
Goldwater was only because Goldwater is dead.  Sauer, of course, ran away
from the thread.

But you jumped in with more aimless name-calling.  You ignored the actual
point of the thread, and jumped in to call me a neo-conservative and a
radical conservative.  I pointed out that you failed to show that EITHER
description was accurate, and that you further embarrassed yourself by
selecting two invectives that were contradictory!  Your only response was
to say that I DON'T KNOW YOUR THOUGHT PROCESSES!  That was the point!  No
one knows your thought processes, because your posts in the thread gave no
sign of any thought processes going on!

And now, as I continually try to get you to read what is written, to try to
understand what it means, and to formulate some coherent response that you
can then post, you go flying off on a NEW tangent.  You accuse me of trying
to get you to agree with me!  Pause here for a second and think about how
absurd that statement is just on its face!

Later on, you can reflect on the fact that you seem to know nothing of my
political views, and that you are wildly shooting in the dark.  Give it
time.  Let it sink in.  But for right now, just marvel at the fact that you
think it a telling criticism to say that someone is trying to get you to
agree with them.  
 
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a