Originally posted by: Perknose
Originally posted by: etech
You're right Perk.
I should not have sunk to your level. I'm sorry.
"And, etech, you simply do not get, a priori, to decide what nationally sourced evidence is germane or admissable here."
Gawd. Don't know how to quit when you're behind, do you?
What, exactly, is the point you're making with that last quote of mine? It's true for you, me, everyone, and
referred explicitly to the fact that (after we established that I was relying not only on Ken Lay quotes and you apologized for saying I had) that, of course,
additional evidence in the form of a Ken Lay quote could not, a priori, be dismissed.
Got that?
Good.
Now, about this ridiculous ad hom accusation you made:
If it fits your agenda, then it's the truth. If it doesn't, it's a lie.
Will you PLEASE back it up or apologize?