Skip to main content

View Diary: Mr. KOS, Code of Conduct Rule No. 1: Ad Hominem Attacks Are Verboten (151 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If ad hominems (6+ / 0-)

    are HR'able, should we go and HR your ad hominem attack on Adam in your last diary?
    Here's is Adam's question, which seems perfectly legitimate:

    So we're clear. (10+ / 0-)
    They're not objecting to the settlement; they just want it to be public?  What is the substance of the Trustee's objection, and has it been publicly filed yet?
    And here is your reply:
    To be clear, you are an Attorney at Law (0+ / 7-)
    who has circled your wagon around protecting the "good ole boys" network in this case - who are engaging in bad faith.

    At the same time, you and your ilk have attacked a victim of organized crime. You defend their lying under oath and grand larceny - as if it really is no big deal.

    Which does not bode well for your claim to be Progressive.

    Until you capitulate to the cold, hard, undeniable FACT that both the MNAT and (the many) Paul Traub law firms have already confessed lying under oath to a chief federal justice (where Martha Stewart went to prison for far, FAR less of an offense).

    Than all that you say and do SIR - ain't work bupkis!

    I bolded the ad hominem attack for clarity.

    Where is your proof that Adam is defending lying under oath  and grand larceny?
    And here is a quote from your present diary;

    You are in full bad faith/bad form if you argue that the person was a Yankee fan, therefore he can't be subjective/objective about the Diary on the Dodgers or Angels. One's circumstance, whom they are and/or guilt by association should NOT apply here - because we profess to be Progressive -

    We are suppose to be better than that!

    One's circumstance, who they are?
    To be clear, you are an Attorney at Law
    Guilt by association?
    At the same time, you and your ilk have attacked a victim of organized crime.
    Ad hominem?
    You defend their lying under oath and grand larceny - as if it really is no big deal.
    Stand down off the cross, laserhaas.

    Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does.

    by skohayes on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 03:55:06 AM PDT

    •  Again - ye too - take today and ignore the yore (0+ / 0-)

      Go back to the D and look at the history of the B, calling me CT years ago, calling for HR'ing and banning.

      With the same banter as always. An attorney engaging in false logic questions, innuendo and assaults

      for the sake of protecting our enemies bad faith acts.

      That is what is sick about this whole thing. He even argued that Romney was not at Bain in 2001. When Obama's campaign and others verified my allegations and broadcast such. He just marched onto a new plane of attacks

      Protecting Organized Criminal Romney & Gang

      and assaulting a victim.

      While you act as if that stuff doesn't matter.


      Mitt Romney was CEO of Bain until Aug 2001. Proof of Bain & Romney Fraud

      by laserhaas on Mon Sep 09, 2013 at 06:27:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site