If anyone was wondering what I meant by "argument of convenience", this is what I meant.
I take apart a whole post of yours and this is all you can reply to it. Fittingly, another non-explanation - do you really think that you can convince people without explaining anything just by repeating your assertions often enough?
Bilbal, I'm afraid you are utterly deceiving yourself as to who is the one making a fool of himself.
Btw what makes you think Lou reads this thread every day, and even if it were so, what exactly do you hope to achieve with that? Are you so short on money that you desperately hope Lou takes you up on your "offer" and pays you $3,500?
sure he is. He says people weren't being objective, I said he wasn't either, then he spends 100 fucking posts refusing to gain the necessary insight needed to BE objective, but somehow claims he is still being objective. Yeah, sure.
See, this is what I mean when I say you should start actually reading and understanding what people write.
You'd be right, of course, if what you say were true. But it isn't. I never claimed I know everything about Caterpillar and Obama or whatever you are playing at. All I said was that people haven't judged objectively what Caterpillar's CEO said. Show me where I have been not objective in this respect. Anything else is simply irrelevant.
You won't answer my questions, why should I answer yours?
I'm not short on money, I'm short on yen, know what that means, genius?
The only two of your questions which I didn't answer were those in your first post about what I know about Jim Owens and the relation between Obama and Caterpillar because, as I have tried to tell you multiple times, this does not have anything to do with my point.
On the other hand, care to count the dozens of my questions and point you have chosen to ignore?
No, I'm much too dumb to have any idea what in the world you could mean with this, oh Wall Street Guru...
It's got nothing to do with Wall Street, idiot.