[kevao]

So you admit they got reported.

Yes, I freely admit those events were reported. Unfortunately, they were reported exactly as you said:

They got twisted and spun to make it look like something it was not,

But that was MY point, not yours.

And, in your reply, you cleverly omitted all the preceding exchanges we had. It's almost as if you did not want people to see what I was replying to.

You are a propagandist (not necessarily bad), but a dishonest one (necessarily bad).

[bagster]

You say this now;

Yes, I freely admit those events were reported. Unfortunately, they were reported exactly as you said:

But you said this then;

I've been here for those rallies -- "Tea Party" 2009 and "Restoring Honor" 2010. They are great fun and beneficial in many other ways. But they do not change minds, because they do not get reported!

But that was MY point (see above), not yours.

No it was not. You bravely folded MY argument into yours and then claimed it as your own.

You are a propagandist (not necessarily bad), but a dishonest one (necessarily bad).

I just proved that I'm not dishonest. That fact is not in dispute.

And you are either stupid or a liar. Maybe both. Definitely a liar, doh.

And a very poor arguer.