Setanta wrote:Willfully misrepresenting someone's statements in a manner which facilitate's an invidioius ridicule is hardly commensurate with either manners, or restraint.
Pot, meet kettle . . .
I've issued no ultimata, although it is in keeping with your hysterical rhetorical tone to suggest as much. Keep it up, boyo, you just show your partisan-inspired antipathy more clearly with each post. Given your expressed contempt for my intellect, and your tone of superior comprehension, and one infers, of superior intellectual honesty, i am surprised you continue to respond. How very much beneath your exalted dignity, boyo.
I didn't "willfully misrepresent" anything. A key element of the Emperor's clothes fable was that it took an innocent child to see and utter the truth. You made the reference and the association followed.
I'll admit to being a bit condescending, but never hysterical. As far as partisanship goes, we are merely partisan about different things. I enjoy the disputes, and that is one of the things this site is all about.
I have no contempt at all for your intellect. Quite the contrary, I admire your knowledge, your writing ability, and some - not all - of your judgements. That's why disputing with you is worth the trouble.
I am perplexed at the intemperateness of your reactions to disagreement and criticisim. You do dish it out a good deal better than you accept or deal with it. There is an important difference between critisim of a particular idea or action and criticism of the character of a person. It seems to me that you often fail to make that distinction and respond rather liberally with character attacks. That is both unnecessary and beneath you. You shouldn't do it.
