Re: I JUST "LET GO", 5 of the 15 PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR ME

On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 18:02:24 -0500, Patriot Games
<Patriot@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 11:02:45 -0500, Zeligg <zeligg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>>On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:38:22 -0500, Patriot Games
>><Patriot@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 12:07:35 -0500, Zeligg <zeligg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>wrote:
>>>>On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 11:57:15 -0500, Patriot Games
>>>><Patriot@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 09:17:48 -0500, Zeligg <zeligg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:18:08 -0600, "ViperSpit"
>>>>>><viper@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>>>>ALL 5 bragged about VOTING for OBAMMY, and ALL 5 now looking for
WORK.
>>>>>>>IT'S called a LESSON in BITING the HAND that FEEDS you.
>>>>>>>HEH HEH,
>>>>>>Really?
>>>>>Liars are exposed:
>>>>>On Wed, 29 Oct 2008 16:40:56 -0400, Zeligg <zeligg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>Sarah AGREED to release her medical records.
>>>>>>>>>>>http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/palins-medical.html
>>>>>>>If you are assuming there ARE issues that would hold up the release
>>>>>>>then how is it possibl for you to ask "How long does it take to
>>>>>>>release existing records?"
>>>>>>I wasn't assuming it.  The article was.  You mentioned it.  I
replied
>>>>>>as to what I thought their assumption might have been.  Did you like
>>>>>>how I wormed my way out of that one?
>>>>>Its called LYING.
>>>>>You said "I wasn't assuming it [issues that would hold up the
>>>>>release].  The article was."
>>>>>The article DOES NOT state that.
>>>>>YOU'RE A LIAR.
>>>>Good god, are you still on this kick. 
>>>Its YOUR Lie.
>>>Learn to live with it.
>>Hahaha, you had to cut the response I gave you.
>
>Learn how to use your newsreader.  You original post is not cut in any
>way.

Seriously?  Now you're going to insist you didn't cut out what I
wrote.  When all you have to do is look at your previous post and see
that you completely cut it?  I don't have to prove you're a liar,
you're doing fine all by youself.
>
>>Is that because you
>>want to pretend I didn't explain why it's not a lie, or because you
>>just have no answer to facts?
>
>The FACTS are:
>
>You said "I wasn't assuming it [issues that would hold up the
>release].  The article was."
>
>The article DOES NOT state that.

Are you looking for a line that says "Here's our assumption?"  Do you
need it put that plainly to you?  And I see you cut and ignored what I
posted AGAIN.  If you read what I wrote instead of constantly ignoring
it, you wouldn't look quite like the idiot you do now.
>
>There is no such thing as an explanation for a LIE.
>
>YOU'RE A LIAR.

Prove it.  You're not doing too well, so far.
>
>>Silly boy, you're never going to get the best of me.
>
>That doesn't interest me in the least.

Yes it does.
>
>Performing a Public Service letting others know that YOU are a PROVEN
>LIAR does interest me.

The only public service you could perform is giving anyone pregnant
with your children an abortion.  THAT would be for the good of the
country.  What you are doing now is just silly. 
>
>Its YOUR Lie.
>
>Learn to live with it.

Prove it.  You can start by answering this, which you cut out again
time:
-------------------------------
Hahaha, you had to cut the response I gave you.  Is that because you
want to pretend I didn't explain why it's not a lie, or because you
just have no answer to facts?  Either way, I'm getting a little dizzy
running all these circles around you.

So, I'll kindly add it back here for you:

---------------------------------
I'll explain it once more,
since English is apparently not your native language.  The article
says:

"the McCain-Palin campaign is feeling no sense of urgency about
actually releasing any records.

AND

"Comella declined to give any more information about when the records
might be released or whether there were any particular issues holding
up their release."

Are you going to tell me that either of these are statements of fact?
They are assumptions designed to look like facts so that lemmings like
you will be lead around by the writer of the article.
---------------------------

And just for good measure, here's the definition of assume:

as?sume
   /??sum/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [uh-soom] Show IPA Pronunciation
verb (used with object), -sumed, -sum?ing.
1. 	to take for granted or without proof; suppose; postulate;
posit: to assume that everyone wants peace. 
---------------------------

You can keep denying (read: lying) that you aren't cutting anything,
but anyone can easily look at your previous post and see you are.  But
keep it up, you're probably impressing the hell out of Oz, and Jak,
and Kilgore-- you know, all the intellectuals in this group.





           Zeligg

"For anyone who finds it odd that a smut peddler 
 would presume to speak on political matters, 
 let me say that I am not a ****ographer trying 
 to rise to the level of politics.  
 ...it is the attack-dog politics of the radical 
 conservative that has descended to the level of ****."

                          Larry Flynt