The Cashill Standoff: Day Three
Gauntlet thrown … and there it is, still on the ground. I kicked it, but nothing doing. Not that I did expect or am expecting any different, but it’d be nice to see someone with the guts to defend their argument in a public forum. Otherwise, we’re liable to become a nation of Goldsteins, too “sick [and] tired [to] care” or even pretend to. Because that’s what “rightwing bad boy[s]” do these days: make unsubstantiated claims before bowing out on account of the vapors they’ve given themselves to avoid ever having defending their specious arguments.
Don’t blame me; I followed instructions and sent him a link to your post. Surprisingly, I have received no response. Also, too, an “aol.com” address? Welcome to 1982…sucker.
Hey! My “aol.com” address simply shows what an internet pioneer I was!
I had a case last year where the plaintiffs’ attorney was using a “prodigy.net” email address
Arriviste — 73227.1510@compuserve.com
Um, that address is about as operative as one of Nixon’s assertions.
uts.amdahl.com!jjh00
Why do you still bother with Goldstein? He’s not only dishonest, but he’s unstable
Because sometimes it’s fun to poke a rabid raccoon with a stick.
I think this is rather more of a dead skunk, but whatever gets you through the night.
In this case, it’s because he was part of the original debate, and defended Cashill quite vociferously. Mostly, then, I’m giving him the opportunity to defend himself in light of Cashill’s subsequent evidentiary “finds.” It would seem intellectually dishonest of me to do otherwise.
VIPRE says that link is dangerous.
“Gauntlet thrown”. Wow, a double-dog dare. A person doesn’t see that very often nowadays.
He keeps complaining that no one will seriously engage his arguments. I have … and want to make sure that if someone consults the Great Google about the issue of no one engaging his arguments, he’ll be proven a liar and a fraud. Unless, of course, he takes my criticism seriously and responds to it.
We call that a win-win.
He’ll simply point out that a computer analysis of your post shows that it was really written by Vladimir Lenin, and how can he debate with a dead man?
I believe that qualifies as waiting for Godot.
By the way, if I ever offend your sensibilities? I apologize beforehand.