"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

How about, as recently as today, when you asked "And you didn't read the
following message?", an obvious lie since there was no following message
to be
read?


You responded to my message; "You're confusing tax rates with tax revenue.
Reagan cut tax rates, tax revenue then rose, rising tax revenue does lead to
deficits." The message following that one is; "Oops, that obviously should
have been '...rising tax revenue does not lead to deficits.' Well, I guess
that isn't so obvious to some!"



And you weren't referring to other or previous messages, so don't try to
use that as an excuse. You referred to "the following message" and there
was
none, which means that you lied when you inferred that there was a message
following.


I obviously was referring to another message. Well, I guess that isn't so
obvious to some!