that looking at all sides of an issue is something we always must do but you get the impression from his posts that nobody but him possesses that ability.

The thing is, your initial post didn't seem to take a side. It was completely informational as far as I could tell.

If you notice too, my attack back at him wasn't on his message so much as his style. He will almost never acknowledge that a person has any valid points to make when he begins his countering diatribe. Would it hurt someone that supposedly is an eloquent and friendly human being to occasionally start off a retort with "All valid points. However, I've also heard that ....."

Also, his information was something that he had used as a response before so I don't think his intent was to educate but merely to lash back at information that had been used to discredit his political ideology in the past. One thing though that I found so absurd was that you have at times been on the same side politically so why he would believe your post to be damaging is beyond me.

The past decade has seen far too much of this debating style that Tom and a few others employ where courtesy and respect of your opponent views seems to be viewed as a sign of weakness and it has divided us so much that I simply don't have any tolerance left for it. I've decided to take it on full force whenever it rears its ugly head. If it appears I'm using the same tactic as they are, believe me it's not my preferred style. It's just that life experience has shown me it's the only way to isolate bullies.

Art