You wrote to Sergey: 'People who write this kind of stuff are automatically added to my "no reason to waste my time on this guy" list.".
What kind of 'other facts' you added here?

>Check again and you will see that I replied to Sergey, I don't feel any obligation to defend what I write to someone else. My comment was based solely on what John wrote in this thread, and has nothing to do with what else he has written before.
>
>>Are you sure that you wrote any "other facts"? The only thing I see is a judgment that talking to John is below your level.
>>
>>>When someone write a bunch of onesided "facts" I reserve the right to write a bunch of other "facts". That does not mean that I want to take any part in the discussion as such, I just want to add some comment to create a balance. I find it equally boring to discuss with someone who agrees with me 100% as to discuss with someone who does not agree with me at all. As a matter of fact I have family members who just love to discuss and argue, so I have had more than enough of that many years ago. I normally try to avoid getting into a discussion unless it's something which is important for me persoanally.
>>>
>>>>Except to comment that you aren't going to comment, right? ;)
>>>>
>>>>>I have met John many times, and know that he's a good guy. But a good guy can have POVs which are quite different from mine. And as I wrote, I don't waste my time discussing these matters with them. That doesn't mean that I don't respect them or like them. It's just that I let them speak out without making any public comments myself.
>>>>>
>>>>>>John's a good guy and generally worth listening to. He was just a little fired up there.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>People who write this kind of stuff are automatically added to my "no reason to waste my time on this guy" list.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>What it has to do with VFP? There's Chatter forum on UT for sh*t like that.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Did anyone watch Obama's address to Congress?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>OK, now this dude had moved into the category of outright liar. No earmarks? Hahahahah....the average American will burp, pull the tab on a new beer, and move on. But the truth is that the latest spending bill has between $4 Bn and $8 Bn in earmarks depending the interpreter,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Now they're pushing through a bill to give the District of Columbia voting representatives. Seems fair, right? But it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL, The only way legally to do this is through a Constitutional Amendment. But, golly gee, that would be inconvenient to Congress do we'll just overlook that aspect.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>All you idiots who voted for this guy without knowing what he realy stood for and are singing his praises still are clueless or ... I dunno ... fascists. He's boiling the frogs, folks. If you don't know the analogy look it up.