Group: sci.med.diseases.lyme
Lyme Disease: patient support, research & information.
Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Yet ANOTHER note to Minitails--
Yet ANOTHER note to Minitails--
(Sigh)
If you have something to say...WHY don't you just post it, here,
please? This is kind of silly...and the board is unmoderated...so you
can speak your mind.
===============================================================
"Hi there 3rd Man",
Hi, there, Minitails--
"I haven't been over to look at Scimed for quite a while. But, when
Rita suggested it, I clicked. You certainly have had lots to say about
the CT AG settlement and it's nice to have your perspective".
Thanks.
"Oh course, Mr. Man, I ran across your rather unfortunate comments of
May 6th, which I don't think need to be reprinted here".
"Unfortunate"? In what respect? And why shouldn't they be reprinted?
"Clearly I upset you and that's too bad".
Uhhhh...no. I was just trying to straighten out what I thought was a
confusing mess in which I was being mis-quoted and misunderstood. It's
called a "point of personal privilege". Wasn't "upset" at all. Sorry
if I gave that impression.
"I guess you haven't been reading the totality of my comments and
research about the various lyme groups that I've posted lately.
There's no point in repeating it, if you're interested you can find
it".
No, I haven't. Sorry.
"As far as what I said about those comments that LE quoted, obviously,
she didn't cite them, let me clarify".
My recollection was that Rita quoted something I said without
attributing it directly to me. Then, LE made some comment that you
interpreted as approving of what I had said.
Then, you addressed what I had said, and made, in the process, what I
felt were several errors in interpretation and mis-characterizations
of what I had said. (Among these, a fairly serious one, that I had
accused the Conn AG of a major breach of the law...which I most
certainly DID NOT).
Looked to me as though I might be getting caught in the middle of an
ongoing feud between yourself and LE...not something I wanted, or
needed, thank you.
"What turned out to be your comment about Pat Smith and her desire for
revenge, it's not so much a matter that I find it hard to believe
she'd like some good old fashion revenge, it's just that you didn't
quote or cite and it was vaguely written in my opinion. We can guess
what she might be thinking, but we can't know. That's all".
Well, as I said...I recalled a quote she made that seemed to tie the
IDSA investigation to some form of payback...and said that I was
"GUESSING". This means I was GUESSING. Tryign to read between the
lines what the motivations might have been. Pat and I just aren't on
that intimate of terms, you see.
I think that this may have been what I remembered, or something
similar:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are patients, we are families of patients, and quite frankly we
are tired of a small group of individuals dictating that patients
should not be getting treatment for a disease that they have," she
said. After feeling harassed for years, she added, patients were
standing up for their rights and challenging disease experts, who are
"getting a dose of their own medicine."
http :// www .washingtonpost,com /wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/14/AR2007051401002.html
==============================================================See that? "getting a dose of their own medicine"? Does that sound like
she means now 'you're gonna get yours'? See that? I also, apparently,
made reference to these remarks in succeeding posts in the archives,
here. Do you really think it is a stretch to refer to that remark as a
"payback" as I did?
"As far as the AG goes, you may be a lawyer but I know my way around
politics".
I think I know a little, too...how about that? We have something in
common. Is this experience-based on your part? And I also know a
little about how prosecutors sometimes use the power of their office
in what are known as "political prosecutions".
I wish lyme patients appeared more "balanced" as some of the more
vocal ones don't, and unless you have some sort of indication or proof
that the AG was at the beck and call of Pat Smith, making comments
like that, in my opinion alone (I'm not talking for anyone else),
might sound nutty to a wider audience. That tends to cause me concern"
Excuse me?
Again...when did I say that the "AG was at the beck and call" of Pat
Smith? Again, I would apopreciate it if you would not put words in my
mouth that I did NOT say.
What I DID say, I believe, was that Blumenthal's office had
acknowledged a "special relationship" with the LDA.
Now...do you REALLY dispute this? Are you going to make me look this
up for you, also? Don't you know about this? You mean that you didn't
see Blumenthal at previous rallies? I believe Pat has given him some
awards, also. Look it up, if it "concerns" you...
"In the end, I think you simply expressed your opinion, which I hope
you keep expressing".
Uhhh...YEAH!!! It was my O-P-I-N-I-O-N. Why would you suggest
anything different? HUH?
"However, when things get quoted without attribution, which clearly
have no way of being either proved or disproved, I think we do
ourselves a disserve".
Do you understand that this was written on a DISCUSSION board...and
NOT for publication? That it was an expression of PERSONAL OPINION?
"It's nothing personal, I don't feel that everyone has to agree with
each other. You have have your opinions and I have mine and I bet many
of them are quite similar. I live in CA, I'm quite familiar with the
goings on of CALDA, internally, and their relationship to the LDA. And
no, my local is not an affiliate of CALDA for many, many reasons".
Swell.
"One last thing, I appreciate that you don't post here, but I don't
post at Scimed in large part because of such behavior as your attack
on me while you were rebutting my rebuttal to another poster on this
website".
WHAT "attack" on you? While I was "rebutting my rebuttal to another
poster"? Sheesh.
"I cannot imagine why you felt the need to throw in the stuff about
fighting and was it hair pulling, and time outs or something"?
Because you and LE had a very prolonged and absurdly trivial and very
senseless childish spat . And THAT...observing that, is a BIG part of
why I decided not to post at LNE.
Both of you...were thinking only of your personal feud and had no
consideration for stressing out the administrator...or the forum...and
now you seemingly want to involve me, too.
Whatever, but obviously, you know that anyone who's actually
interested in a dialogue with someone else, doesn't write such
offensive nonsense".
What "offensive nonsense"?
"This is completely rhetorical, but why are disagreements between
women different than disagreements between men or different than
between the two genders. Like this one, for instance".
Who said they were?
"We've both survived and I didn't throw in some inappropriate personal
comment. I hope if this comes up again, maybe you could do me the same
courtesy".
If you think that I threw in some "inappropriate personal
comment"...would you, perhaps, have the courtesy to at least tell me
what that comment was?
Give me a clue?
(Sigh)
If you have something to say...WHY don't you just post it, here,
please? This is kind of silly...and the board is unmoderated...so you
can speak your mind.
===============================================================
"Hi there 3rd Man",
Hi, there, Minitails--
"I haven't been over to look at Scimed for quite a while. But, when
Rita suggested it, I clicked. You certainly have had lots to say about
the CT AG settlement and it's nice to have your perspective".
Thanks.
"Oh course, Mr. Man, I ran across your rather unfortunate comments of
May 6th, which I don't think need to be reprinted here".
"Unfortunate"? In what respect? And why shouldn't they be reprinted?
"Clearly I upset you and that's too bad".
Uhhhh...no. I was just trying to straighten out what I thought was a
confusing mess in which I was being mis-quoted and misunderstood. It's
called a "point of personal privilege". Wasn't "upset" at all. Sorry
if I gave that impression.
"I guess you haven't been reading the totality of my comments and
research about the various lyme groups that I've posted lately.
There's no point in repeating it, if you're interested you can find
it".
No, I haven't. Sorry.
"As far as what I said about those comments that LE quoted, obviously,
she didn't cite them, let me clarify".
My recollection was that Rita quoted something I said without
attributing it directly to me. Then, LE made some comment that you
interpreted as approving of what I had said.
Then, you addressed what I had said, and made, in the process, what I
felt were several errors in interpretation and mis-characterizations
of what I had said. (Among these, a fairly serious one, that I had
accused the Conn AG of a major breach of the law...which I most
certainly DID NOT).
Looked to me as though I might be getting caught in the middle of an
ongoing feud between yourself and LE...not something I wanted, or
needed, thank you.
"What turned out to be your comment about Pat Smith and her desire for
revenge, it's not so much a matter that I find it hard to believe
she'd like some good old fashion revenge, it's just that you didn't
quote or cite and it was vaguely written in my opinion. We can guess
what she might be thinking, but we can't know. That's all".
Well, as I said...I recalled a quote she made that seemed to tie the
IDSA investigation to some form of payback...and said that I was
"GUESSING". This means I was GUESSING. Tryign to read between the
lines what the motivations might have been. Pat and I just aren't on
that intimate of terms, you see.
I think that this may have been what I remembered, or something
similar:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are patients, we are families of patients, and quite frankly we
are tired of a small group of individuals dictating that patients
should not be getting treatment for a disease that they have," she
said. After feeling harassed for years, she added, patients were
standing up for their rights and challenging disease experts, who are
"getting a dose of their own medicine."
http :// www .washingtonpost,com /wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/14/AR2007051401002.html
==============================================================See that? "getting a dose of their own medicine"? Does that sound like
she means now 'you're gonna get yours'? See that? I also, apparently,
made reference to these remarks in succeeding posts in the archives,
here. Do you really think it is a stretch to refer to that remark as a
"payback" as I did?
"As far as the AG goes, you may be a lawyer but I know my way around
politics".
I think I know a little, too...how about that? We have something in
common. Is this experience-based on your part? And I also know a
little about how prosecutors sometimes use the power of their office
in what are known as "political prosecutions".
I wish lyme patients appeared more "balanced" as some of the more
vocal ones don't, and unless you have some sort of indication or proof
that the AG was at the beck and call of Pat Smith, making comments
like that, in my opinion alone (I'm not talking for anyone else),
might sound nutty to a wider audience. That tends to cause me concern"
Excuse me?
Again...when did I say that the "AG was at the beck and call" of Pat
Smith? Again, I would apopreciate it if you would not put words in my
mouth that I did NOT say.
What I DID say, I believe, was that Blumenthal's office had
acknowledged a "special relationship" with the LDA.
Now...do you REALLY dispute this? Are you going to make me look this
up for you, also? Don't you know about this? You mean that you didn't
see Blumenthal at previous rallies? I believe Pat has given him some
awards, also. Look it up, if it "concerns" you...
"In the end, I think you simply expressed your opinion, which I hope
you keep expressing".
Uhhh...YEAH!!! It was my O-P-I-N-I-O-N. Why would you suggest
anything different? HUH?
"However, when things get quoted without attribution, which clearly
have no way of being either proved or disproved, I think we do
ourselves a disserve".
Do you understand that this was written on a DISCUSSION board...and
NOT for publication? That it was an expression of PERSONAL OPINION?
"It's nothing personal, I don't feel that everyone has to agree with
each other. You have have your opinions and I have mine and I bet many
of them are quite similar. I live in CA, I'm quite familiar with the
goings on of CALDA, internally, and their relationship to the LDA. And
no, my local is not an affiliate of CALDA for many, many reasons".
Swell.
"One last thing, I appreciate that you don't post here, but I don't
post at Scimed in large part because of such behavior as your attack
on me while you were rebutting my rebuttal to another poster on this
website".
WHAT "attack" on you? While I was "rebutting my rebuttal to another
poster"? Sheesh.
"I cannot imagine why you felt the need to throw in the stuff about
fighting and was it hair pulling, and time outs or something"?
Because you and LE had a very prolonged and absurdly trivial and very
senseless childish spat . And THAT...observing that, is a BIG part of
why I decided not to post at LNE.
Both of you...were thinking only of your personal feud and had no
consideration for stressing out the administrator...or the forum...and
now you seemingly want to involve me, too.
Whatever, but obviously, you know that anyone who's actually
interested in a dialogue with someone else, doesn't write such
offensive nonsense".
What "offensive nonsense"?
"This is completely rhetorical, but why are disagreements between
women different than disagreements between men or different than
between the two genders. Like this one, for instance".
Who said they were?
"We've both survived and I didn't throw in some inappropriate personal
comment. I hope if this comes up again, maybe you could do me the same
courtesy".
If you think that I threw in some "inappropriate personal
comment"...would you, perhaps, have the courtesy to at least tell me
what that comment was?
Give me a clue?
Re: Yet ANOTHER note to Minitails--
On May 21, 10:05 pm, the 3rd Man <derdrittemann2...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> (Sigh)
>
> If you have something to say...WHY don't you just post it, here,
> please? This is kind of silly...and the board is unmoderated...so you
> can speak your mind.
>
> ================================================================
> "As far as the AG goes, you may be a lawyer but I know my way around
> politics".
Okay, well...that's good...would you mind answering a little question,
then?
What's the issue for you here? What don't you understand with all of
this professional political acumen?
You mean that you are having difficulty understanding that an AG with
his eye on higher office might...just might want to asssociate himself
in the public as a knight in shing armor, the champion of the public
interest in the healthcare arena? (Rise...I dub thee, Sir
"Fruitbasket").
Is this difficult to understand in terms of political math?
And...considering that Lyme is such a high profile issue in
Connecticut?
Look...I didn't say...ever...as you suggested, that Blumenthal was at
the LDA's "beck and call"...those were YOUR words.
Sometimes, there are political alliances of mutual benefit.
I think that Blumenthal simply thought this was a good issue to be
associated with.and the Pat is an old friend.
Who knows, really? he got a lot of good publicity...and the general
perception seems to be (at least now) that something positive was
accomplished.
On May 21, 10:05 pm, the 3rd Man <derdrittemann2...@yahoo,com > wrote:
> (Sigh)
>
> If you have something to say...WHY don't you just post it, here,
> please? This is kind of silly...and the board is unmoderated...so you
> can speak your mind.
>
> ================================================================
> "As far as the AG goes, you may be a lawyer but I know my way around
> politics".
Okay, well...that's good...would you mind answering a little question,
then?
What's the issue for you here? What don't you understand with all of
this professional political acumen?
You mean that you are having difficulty understanding that an AG with
his eye on higher office might...just might want to asssociate himself
in the public as a knight in shing armor, the champion of the public
interest in the healthcare arena? (Rise...I dub thee, Sir
"Fruitbasket").
Is this difficult to understand in terms of political math?
And...considering that Lyme is such a high profile issue in
Connecticut?
Look...I didn't say...ever...as you suggested, that Blumenthal was at
the LDA's "beck and call"...those were YOUR words.
Sometimes, there are political alliances of mutual benefit.
I think that Blumenthal simply thought this was a good issue to be
associated with.and the Pat is an old friend.
Who knows, really? he got a lot of good publicity...and the general
perception seems to be (at least now) that something positive was
accomplished.
