|
01-09-2010, 12:05 PM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by REH7380
RSHOFFER..Thanks for adding to the background on the problem. I have intentionally not identified the "source" as that is not important. What is important is the accuracy. It is up to the naysayers to read the facts and then "factually" challenge it if is wrong. Identifying source's only allows for one more avenue for the naysayers to attack the messenger without knowledge. Hopefully they will do their homework, be unbiased in their analysis and add to the discussion with intelligence and not political leaning nor
generally negative attitudes. Again, thanks for constructive input.  |
I think that if I were you I wouldn't bother with us; the biased, uneducated, factually challenged, unknowledgeable, non-homework doing, unintelligent, political leaning, negative, naysaying masses. We aren't worth your time. It is very evident that you are so much better prepared to deal with this problem on your own. I think we all look up with you with deepest respect.
|