@georgeob1,
In this case, I feel perfectly comfortable doing so - just as in some cases, you feel perfectly comfortable doing so in turn.
You have a real tendency to, when attacked, start attacking others instead of actually defending your point. Thomas was simply pointing out that the facts you listed - which he didn't say you were wrong about - were not, in fact, a blemish on Keynes' reputation or credentials in the slightest. Your answer back to him, while technically true, misses the spirit of his comment completely.
As an example: if you work for a business which is failing, and accurately realize that it's failing because of factors X Y and Z, quit that business, and go on to write extensively on the subject of how these and other things cause businesses to fail, it's fallacious to say that your only experience is 'employee of a failed business.' It's technically true but substantively false.
And let's be honest: you demean Keynes because his theories say that much of what
you consider to be sound economic advice is perfectly incorrect.
Cycloptichorn