What is this that you claim I own?
Emphasis mine, from the bottom of the web page:
That is a nice end-run around the question, there. You earlier claimed that I owned something. i asked you to clarify and you blew a bunch of smoke instead of approaching the question. For a moment here I thought we were about to get close to having actually discussions again, when you posted a link to a web site that actually had sourced numbers on it instead of hyperpartisan spin. Now you've gone back to the latter again.
Over here, you're trying to shame me
I was pointing out that you adopted a shameful discussion strategy. I raised questions, and even paid compliments. You responded in outrage and question avoidance. It was no different from the congressional response to the Benghazi reports that were more than 90% in support of the conservative message but they were up in arms over the small amount that questioned their rhetoric.
I would wager that you voted for at least one person who supported the PATRIOT act, do you own that?
In this thread, you're trying to shift the discussion to the PATRIOT Act.
Actually, no. I wasn't trying to discuss the PATRIOT act. Rather the best I could guess from your vaporous comment of my alleged ownership was that you were trying to pin some piece of legislation on me. So I figured I might as well mention a massively unpopular bit of legislation that was previously immensely popular with people from your party. We don't have to discuss the act itself, I was just trying to see if the same degree of political liability applies in both directions or if this is another case of where moral parity is unimportant in comparison to your need to make a point.