|
|
 |
|
|
|
#1
01-16-2010, 04:18 PM
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
They said one thing, than they said this, a week later. They were keeping her in training, so they were obviously giving it at least very serious consideration, for bringing her back. How is that not deceitful? And how the hell have my 'assumptions' been off the board so far? What the fugg does that even mean? Are you really that naive to believe the things you are saying? You are probably the most ridiculous poster on all of DT. 
|
|
#2
01-16-2010, 05:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
You have the worst reading comprehension issues I have ever seen ... It was assumed she was retired, and they constantly fielded the question--that's what the frig your assumptions got you---the inability to perceive the less-than -obvious ... You also do not consider the possibilty that the Mosses were undecided about whether to retire her or not, and kept the horse in training until they did ??? And annoyingly fluffed direct answers .. Your peurile comment about who is a ridiculous poster deserves you a hand mirror ... I am at least willing to read or listen to caca and respond to it somewhat civilly without pitching monkey poo ... Clearly you are not ... It is hardly ridiculous to examine all possibilities when the probabilities are not made clear by the only people that count here---the connections ... BTW---It was the headline in the racing publication that Zenyatta was still retired, made by the reporter . Read it
|
|
#3
01-16-2010, 06:13 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If I have reading comprehension issues than you certainly have hearing comprehension issues. They repeatedly said she was retired. As in the Mosses said she was retired. How is it that you keep failing to grasp that they have said she is retired? How does that translate to me not being able to understand what I read? Your constant denying of reality and making up a fantasy to deflect your hostility at me is really hard for me to understand. I'll give you that. And yeah, I get it. They were undecided about keeping her in training. Hence my question in the first place. If they were, at the very least, undecided, why the constant denying that she might race again? Why stick to your guns that she is retired. This isn't some writer making this up, these were point blank questions that they answered and until just a few days ago, they were insistent she is retired. Slewbopper. I'm just sick of people, especially in the media, not being able to say what they mean and mean what they say. The Mosses and Sherriffs have been playing games with the truth all last year in how they discussed Zenyatta with the press. For nearly a year now, they've not been able to give a straight answer. How is that ok? And yet again, if you read my first post, I did preface my complaint by saying I'm happy that they have decided to continue to race her. Why all the subterfuge though?
|
|
#4
01-16-2010, 06:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
If you say so, et al---I don't ... Glad you are so happy---perhaps then, you will not qualify your happiness ad nauseum then ...
|
|
#5
01-16-2010, 10:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Like this one? Where Shirreffs says "she will remain in my barn for a couple weeks before going to Kentucky to be bred" or "Zenyatta's retirement is a big hole for racing, not just my barn" Couldn't be more clear that they're pulling a Brett Favre here. And I'm ecstatic about it.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
|
Hybrid Mode
