You still keeping missing the point...don't know what to say to that.
Let me try one more time....maybe if I put it in a different color....
My issue was with the FALSE information, your thoughts, you posted as if it was fact.
How much clearer can I make it. It has nothing to do with what you or I think of Maggi Moss, Assmussen or Dutrow. It has to do with you stating
your opinions as fact.
Then of course you have to get all "looney" as if you just came out of the 'bin" and got all defensive.
I never said I condoned anything that was said or done.., I never defended their practices....well I did the new horse foundation for injured horses, hard to hate on that, but I'm sure you will.
You seem to think I disagree with your perception of them, when actually you wouldn't know any better because you got defensive. I actually never disagreed with you, I just said your portrayal of the interview was not factual.
I think you need this definition more than I do.
Rumor
n.- A piece of unverified information of uncertain origin usually spread by word of mouth.
- Unverified information received from another; hearsay.
You just didn't like I verified what you said was not the truth it was just your opinion of an interview, so now you have to call me names.
I get it, you just think by calling people names they will concede to your opinion. You just like to argue and hate on people, boards, horses, owners, trainers.
Why do you play the game if you hate everything about it?
Let me ask you this, when betting do you use any of your hated trainers/owners horses? If not good for you, if so then you are a hypocrite.
And as far as Moss, well he also said that lasix has no benefits, to which Peter Lurrie responded they had a horse that bled and put it on lasix and it doesn't bleed. Moss had no repsonse.
Can you ever have a discussion without calling people names that dont' agree with you?
Maybe I shouldn't have asked you questions because you will carry on your usual mode of operation and call me names.