<p>You just misquoted me, above.</p>
<p>You’ve also mischaracterized my first post here as giving you “a speech about why PP is necessary” when I actually wrote “If you think these services shouldn’t come from an organization that also provides abortion services and wasn’t founded by Margaret Sanger, that’s fine. I’m just interested in finding out where those services will come from if Congress shaves off that $75 million.” (I personally don’t care about Planned Parenthood and never said I did. It’s the continued delivery of the services that matter. And you’re still flapping in the breeze with no answer as to how the de-funded services will be delivered in the absence of PP.)</p>
<p>But you stray further off the deep-end because you expressly invited me to reply to you, suggesting that my not doing so implied that your points are cogent. (Seeing as you made no attempt to answer any of the questions I raised, I saw no reason to reply to your moving target arguments.) But now, after pouting that I hadn’t replied, you’re babbling about heroes, innocent bystanders and white knights (what the…?), saying I shouldn’t have replied to you or pointed out that calgal had the wisest approach (which, happily, you’re now embracing).</p>
<p>So, yes, I agree that it is best to cut bait…especially when your chief persuasive tool here is to threaten people with more of you if they respond.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So, before throwing down claims of “hypocrisy” and coming up with contorted “follow your own advice” statements only to the extent they suit you and relieve you from responding to valid points, do consider that you’re the biggest kettle here.</p>
<p>(Was that a “hero,” “innocent bystander,” or “white knight” reply?)</p>