Seriously?
The truth is, foolishly giggling clown, I insisted on nothing of the sort. In fact I've insisted on nothing at all in this thread.
What I actually did, at 5:32 AM yesterday, was re-post my original claim, recap in full the case for that claim, and then, finally, having had my say, I "let it go at that," that is to say, I "rested my case," so to speak. Totally, unremarkably routine, resting one's case happens every day in courtrooms across the country. But has there ever been a case anywhere in the world where a lawyer reacted to the opposition's closing remarks with an outlandishly buffoonish "Objection! He insists on having the last word!"? I seriously doubt it. And the preposterousness of it all hits even harder when one considers such a case as this where it was the objector himself who assumed the role of "Dispenser of the Final Word" (see your 6:12 AM post of yesterday).
You see, forty minutes after I had had what you are falsely referring to as "the last word," you proceeded to post extraneous ramblings of zero value with respect to countering my now week-old claim. You are perfectly free to let those ramblings remain as the discussion's "last word," if you wish, or, if you have even grander ambitions, you may ensure that you get in "the last word" and then some by expanding on the content of that post, debating the extraneous with yourself for reasons that lie beyond the scope of rational justification. Or ... whatever -- it's your choice. Makes no difference to me, as in no way, shape or form have I ever insisted on having the last word, nor am I doing so now.
And don't even think of trying to argue that my 12:11 PM post of yesterday at any point served as "the last word" of the discussion, as the post offered absolutely nothing new, its sole purpose being to inform, or to remind you, if you weren't already aware of it, that I had already "rested my case" by the time your extraneous ramblings were Sealion-slapped to the board at 6:12 AM.
Message Thread
« Back to index