But you admitted ("secret societies" is pretty much a dead giveaway, so there was no point in protesting) you were insincere in your initial ("Wha...? Bush?? Who said Bush?") denial.
There are a couple of interpretations of the word "cult". One is nothing to be terribly offended about - just a descriptive term but not intended in the true religious sense (I don't believe Dan thinks Christians will really leave Christ to follow Alan Keyes, to illustrate). The other is the true, religious sense. I can believe Dan meant the former. See the difference? You were talking about Bush, but you played innocent about it, then admitted it. Dan, I think, was (deliberately) misinterpreted.
And for the record, I'm not mad either!
One more time: I never denied I was referring to Bush. I did deny mentioning his name because I didn't. And I explained to you numerous times why I intentionally avoided mentioning his name--posts 520; 525; 532.
BTW, Dan didn't use the word cult---but he used the term "Keyes Kultists".
Whoopee....I get to chime in with my interpretation of what someone said....and I base this not on a grin, a nod of the head, a wink, a shuffling of feet, or body language.
It is my opihnion that Keyes for President said Wha..? or Whoa...? Bush?? because first of all he had not uttered a name (he was being tactful or discreet )--in which case, new or converted from liberalism readers might well not have any inkling as to who was being referenced. Secondly, he is trying to deny that he used the name, which is the truth....he did not attach a name to anyone that belonged to a secret society, who was considered a party animal, or class clown, or less likely to succeed, who had offspring that followed in their Daddy's footsteps, or any of those other terms that the general population is unfamiliar with.
I see no reason to believe differently, and I believe you are wrong to not see it MY way. :)
Well, not unless, of course, you saw the way he smiled...in which case you can explain to me how you interpret his smile!!!