[Vision2020] And the Hits Just keep On Coming . . .

[Andreas Schou]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 12:35 PM, g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
> Is it your contention that Dr. Harkins CPA,  Professor Emeritus of the
> University of Idaho Collage of Business, Department of Accounting is unable
> to read a small town budget report and has the facts all wrong?

No. It is, rather, my contention that he didn't, or did and then
thought that no one would actually check. I'm not calling him
incompetent; I'm calling him a liar. Again, for anyone that's
interested, you can check the '98 cite on page 65. The contingency
numbers correspond to the police chief's quotations from the
Frontiersman article. As for anything further, I am not going to shout
a full and unnecessary bibliography at Dr. Harkins' departing back.

> Or, as is somewhat more likely given previous discussions I have had with
> you on this forum, did you lift the whole thing in its entirety from the
> huffington post and throw that bit about primary sources in an attempt to
> lend a semblance of authenticity and credence to your argument?

Gee, Gary. If you thought so, you'd think you'd've at least accused me
of doing so before. We've had quite a bit of correspondence, ande
you've actually never accused me of that, which is sort of amazing
given the broad miscellany of personal accusations you've made against
me over the years.

Again, I'm telling you outright: no, I didn't read 300 pages of
financial disclosures from beginning to end. Rather, I found someone
else pointing at the cites, I looked them up, confirmed that they were
accurate, and sent Jeff directly to the primary source, evading the
inevitable argument about the reliability of a Washington Monthly
comment thread and the 'those could've been cut-and-pasted from
anywhere' argument regarding the snapshots from the PDF. Following
bibliographic chains to primary sourcesis a time-honored research
technique, and one that saves a tremendous amount of
wheel-reinventing.

I'm hadn't claimed at any point to have done original research, only
that the primary sources supported my argument. Again, you aren't
accusing me of lying. You aren't disputing the facts as they stand.
You aren't accusing me of cutting-and-pasting language from the
article. You're merely making an issue of how I happened to know why
Dr. Harkins was wrong.

-- ACS