Comment: I had hoped no one would take the bait

(See in situ)


I had hoped no one would take the bait

We already had this argument with Shlicter last week.
http://www.dailypaul.com/255426/continuing-to-squeal-conserv...

Apparently Shlicter was unable to comprehend the valid arguments we gave him in response to last weeks piece of trash.This second article incorporates no new ideas, acknowledges none of the information he was offered, and like the first, presents no supporting arguments. It's just the typical string of repetitive insults, sprinkled with the same demands and threats. Clearly, shlicter enjoys the attention and wants more. Why indulge him?

I had posted my own take on Shlicter's 2nd article 7 or 8 hours before this one was posted.
http://www.dailypaul.com/255994/dont-indulge-childish-attent...
I spent quite a bit of time putting it together, but it was essentially ignored.

NJ