I occasionally click on where it says "view post" to see if you've quoted me. Every once in a while I'll even read it if you've quoted me, though not very often. This was one of those times.
Which shows the whole pomp and circumstance you put on in "ignoring" me was indeed bogus.
It wasn't. Why do you always post with such negativity?
Why do you pretend you don't? In fact, you post
exactly like I do in terms of tone.
I don't get offended by it. But you make a big spectacle out of it. I wouldn't comment on it at all if
you didn't.
Which is why I explained it further.
After saying I "failed" to understand it. Yes, we've been through this before. You post something; you pretend you meant something else, but have to explain the "context," because it wasn't there, and somehow, it's always MY fault for not following the "context" you admit you had to provide later. "No, I didn't provide any context, but you FAILED for not somehow following it anyway." :roll: And you have the nerve to say I'm the "hostile" and "dishonest" one.
The evident reality: you just made it up the new "context" on the fly. This has happened more than once, so the benefit of the doubt is gone.
Keep in mind --
all you had to do was respond to me. You didn't have to go into your dog-and-pony show about taking
me off ignore, etc.
You opened all of this up. If you get to comment about how I post, then turnabout is fair game. It would be quite juvenile to say otherwise. You wanna play, then we play.
And again, you insult. Why are you always so hostile?
Why can't you just post
honestly? And by the way, that wasn't an "insult."
But why does he want it? What benefit does passing gun legislation bring to him?
I told you -- you have to ask
him. But he wants it, and this helps get it. That's his "gain."
I don't have to explain
why he wants. Insisting that I do is (again! shocker!) dishonest.
I didn't ask you to justify it, you jumped into the question I asked VanceMack.
So?