So, you argue with me because you feel my history and my charactersitics should make me different,; that this canary should automatically learn to sing your tune, note for note, once you teach it to me, because it is just unreasonable that I should feel any other way once you have logically laid it all out for me. Do you have any idea how patronizing that sounds? Can you imagine how insulting that is?

I can follow your reasoning perfectly: ER does not follow many of the standard liberal mythologies (as you have meticulously defined them), he is harshly critical of Fidel Castro because of direct family experience,
and he at least claims to be in favor of market capitalism and is opposed to Marxist planned economies. He volunteered for military duty during a time of war and believes in a strong national defense. And he expresses admiration for American institutions and history.

Therefore, ER believes in things I believe in so he should believe everything I believe in, by exactly the same amount. And if he does not, it is clear that he is either misled or profoundly foolish. After all, ER is shown information and he derives different conclusions than TB, and he presents information to TB that TB rejects out of hand. No matter how carefully and clearly TB explains anything ER doubts it and instead counters with information that is totally biased. ER simply refuses to admit he is wrong. How can this be? Clearly there is something wrong with him. ER obstinately refuses to accept the obvious. And not only does he have positions that are clearly erroneous, they are not even consistent with others who have mistaken positions. This is clearly some form of pathology here, like a vitamin deficiency or the lack of some vital enzyme.

But maybe ER has studied the past and evolving political history too, and maybe he doesn't like the world he remembers, the one you seem to be so nostalgic for. Maybe ER even agrees with TB in some things, but that doesn't mean he has to agree with TB about everything. And maybe ER looks at some aspects of the world about him that TB finds alarming, with favor, and vice versa. Maybe ER simply has different priorities, different goals, and different ideals and he feels TBs requirements and desires are inconsistent with his own philosophy and interests and his own pursuit of happiness.

Yeah, I've argued with Johannes. I've argued with gbaike and Techie and Lindy too. Arguing with strangers I feel are mistaken is one of the reasons I come here, but it is not the only reason I come here. Once I established what their positions were on certain topics I no longer felt the need to make them change their minds. I argue with them much less frequently now. But you, TB, seem to have the need to change everybody's mind, all the time. Even when they'd rather talk about something else.

You see, it's not what you believe that makes you strange, its your determination that everyone must believe that way, and that you feel you have the ability and the obligation to make them believe that way, that is so off-putting and ultimately, so infuriating. And what you seem to miss altogether, so counter-productive for your own cause.

Think of it this way. You are very well aware of my opinions on religion and other mystical and spiritual phenomena. I include paranormal fields too in this assessment, like psychic powers and the supernatural. You know how strongly I believe about these issues and how I reject them out of hand. Now just imagine that I interrupted every post that mentioned any of these things to debunk it. That I was constantly arguing with everyone who even alluded to these things, continuously bringing up documentary evidence and authoritative opinions, and when the conversation drifted into a neutral area, or other topics altogether, I posted provocative essays and reports designed to generate controversy and argument on the subject and keep the debate alive and on my chosen topic. Even to someone who might happen to agree with me, can you imagine how annoying that would be?