No, its that your arguments are convoluted, unbelievable and absurd. They also disagree with the estimations of the very people who performed the acts.
Look, you can argue minutae all day, and I can exhaustively walk you through refutation after refutation- but all that will lead to is you re-arranging your arguments (as you did with Tony), or shift the discussion to splitting different semantic hairs (again, as you did with Tony). As I have said in the past, I no longer feel like its worth my time to engage you. The reason I no longer feel like its worth my time is that you (aswith the rest of the right wing) will perform semantic and rhetorical backflip after logical summersault after changing your argument after re-writing history. You actually believe that if you keep arguing , then you are never wrong. And you actually believe if you don't actually lose an argument, then you are right. Its called Sophistry, the corruption of rhetoric, and its as old as reason itself. Its the same sort of crap employed by the Intelligent Design community, the UFO nuts and any other intellectually corrupt group of people you can point to.
So, basically, I don't care. I have ZERO chance of changing your mind or of having you accept the color of the sky, so its just not worth my time. Your ideology and philosophy haa failed in Iraq, it haa empirically failed in the struggle against terrorism, it has empirically shown to be inconsistent with the facts of history. It shifts every week (as in, Tony Snow), it excuse endless acts of dishonesty and unrealism. It is completely blind to its own basic principles (IE, limitations of government power, moral integrity, etc).
You are a zealot, I'm done with you. If you have not noticed, i usually limit myself to two rounds with you on any thread, and then I ignore you.
So why do you bother with discourse? If you have this unique perspective on reality where you are never remotely incorrect, and every destructive trend in history rests entirely on 'liberals' and 'leftists' (two words for the same boogeyman in your universe), why do you come here? This is akin to masturbation, and while I would not call musturbation unhelathy in general, the amount of time you spenddoing it strikes me as unhealthy.
Why even bother listening to the news or reading? All you are doing is seeking out the justifications du'jour about why the extreme Right Wing is right, and coming back here to vomit them out?
You bore me Tom. Sorry. After years of this, you fundamentally bore me to tears.
DL
Flame » in reply to Okay, you're pretty much flat on the mat now.
re: Really? I am? Geee, didn't know that.
The whole thread (41 posts)
- Preemptive cross posting to Flame for TB and GB
- re: Preemptive cross posting to Flame for TB and GB
- Point out where I said "all presidents," or amend your header. (n/t)
- No idea what you're talking about.
- What the hell's your point, then?
- What do you mean "back to that"?
- The Premise...and a reference
- re: The Premise of your argument is that nothing unusual is going on
- "unusual" is not automatically "wrong," never mind "illegal."
- P.S. Show me where I ever used the word "illegal". Your word, not mine. (n/t)
- Clarification...
- You can lead a horse to water
- Give up. He says Bush didn't lie about torture, too.
- You can type it all you like. It's still a lie.
- You can lead a horse to water
- re: If you havent yet seen that the Attoney General lied to Congress...
- "unusual" is not automatically "wrong," never mind "illegal."
- re: The Premise of your argument is that nothing unusual is going on
- Did I not type slowly enough?
- No fake names in this, please. (n/t)
- Sorry.. Should have been (n/t)
- That works. (n/t)
- Sorry.. Should have been (n/t)
- No fake names in this, please. (n/t)
- Has anybody ever told you that you don't know how to make an argument?
- The Premise...and a reference
- What do you mean "back to that"?
- What the hell's your point, then?
- No idea what you're talking about.
