Quote:
Randal_Flagg said:
Quote:
You're right I wouldn't pointed it out, because I am proudly a conservitive. It's thier job to find any errors in the critisism against them, not mine, but I've agknowledged in teh past when people have pointed out hypocracy in teh arguments of some conservitives...... Also if he had also taken a shot at libs then he would have been consistant with his opening thesis so you're also right in that regard.
Yeah.... that's great and all, but see you never critiqued my arguments; you just stooped to name calling. That's another falliacy, it called an ad hominem attack. But, that's cool if that's where you wanna take the dialogue. Personally, I want someone to challenge my views. That's called a learning experience; judging from what other people have said about you being illiterate I guess you haven't had many of those.
The problem w/ political discourse is that in our contempoary media it never rises above this level. We don't talk about ideas and issues, we just call each other names. That's what I was trying to avoid, but....
Hmmmmmmm, arguing with liberals? Maybe this thread should be renamed arguing with conservatives.
"Sometimes even Christians fuck up. Even their wives." -Rush Limbaugh
OK, I'm glad that you know the term ad-hominim, but you failed to use it properly. You see I did adress your argument rather than your person. I pointed out where you shot down a specific practice then in the same post engaged in said practice. I never callled you names as you claim and never devalued your argument based on your person. All I know about you is the arguments you made. I admit to not adressing teh bulk of your argument, but I thought the blatent contradiction should be addressed first and foremost (I understand however if you'd rather not adress that)
Quote:
judging from what other people have said about you being illiterate I guess you haven't had many of those.
Thank YOU for providing a proper example of an ad-hominim attack. First off teh "people" you refer to is rex.... he's one person. Now since you seem to be smarter than the rest of us perhaps you can consider why it may be problomatic to base a conclusion on a single post wherein rex refers to me as illiterate (probobly a referance to my constant typos wich i freely admit to). You see rex thinks he's superior because he flames both conservitives and liberals without acctually engaging either in the type of diologue you seem to be seeking. He also seems to dislike me ever since a single instance in which I took G-Mans side over his. If you would like a mental excersise why don't you acctually look at my past posts, you'll see that I'm more willing to engage with teh left than many here. but I also don't let anyone get away with teh blantent contradictions you tried to slip past.
If you would like to challenge and be challenged then I'm up for it, but if your idea of diologue consists simply of you trying to "educate me, the brain dead neocon" then I'll pass. It's up to you.
Putting the "fun" back in Fundamentalist Christian Dogma.
" I know God exists because WBAM told me so. " - theory9
JLA brand RACK points = 514k 
| 
